I have a working setup using a hardware load balancer that controls redirection in such a fashion that all requests to http://example.com/login/* are redirected (using HTTP 302) to https://example.com/login/* and all requests that are NOT for /login are inversely redirected from HTTPS to HTTP.
This allows me to wrap the login functions and user/password exchange in SSL but otherwise avoid slowing connections with encryption and also solving some problems with embedded content mixed content warnings in some browsers.
The load balance, however, is end of life and I am looking for a replacement solution, preferably in software.
I think HAproxy is going to be able to serve as my load balacing solution, but I have only been able to find configuration examples and documentation for redirecting everything from HTTP to HTTPS, or vice versa.
Is it possible to do what I am proposing using HAproxy or should I look for a different solution?
I realize I will need to use the development version of HAproxy to support SSL at all.
I would suggest you do not use a DEV build for your production environment.
To answer your question, I would assume you're going to use HAProxy version 1.4:
Is it possible to do what I am proposing using HAProxy or should I look for a different solution?
Yes. It is possible but you have to use another software to handle the HTTPS traffic. Stunnel is proven to be good in this. So I'd say the setup is going to be:
HAProxy 1.4
# Redirect http://../login to https://../login
frontend HTTPSRedirect
bind 1.2.3.4:80
default_backend AppServers
redirect prefix https://www.domain.com/login if { path_beg -i /login }
# Handler for requests coming from Stunnel4.
frontend HTTPReceiver
bind 5.6.7.8:80
default_backend AppServers
Stunnel4
[https]
accept=443
connect=5.6.7.8:80 (HAProxy IP)
Related
I need to integrate several web applications on-premise and off-site under a common internally hosted URL. The on-premise applications are in the same data center as the haproxy, but the off-site applications can only be reached via a http proxy because the server on which haproxy is running has no direct Internet access. Therefore I have to use a http Internet proxy, SOCKS might be an option too.
How can I tell haproxy that a backend can only be reached via proxy ?
I would rather not use an additional component like socksify / proxifier / proxychains / tsocks / ... because this introduces additional overhead.
This picture shows the components involved in the setup:
When I run this on a machine with direct Internet connection I can use this config and it works just fine:
frontend main
bind *:8000
acl is_extweb1 path_beg -i /policies
acl is_extweb2 path_beg -i /produkte
use_backend externalweb1 if is_extweb1
use_backend externalweb2 if is_extweb2
backend externalweb1
server static www.google.com:80 check
backend externalweb2
server static www.gmx.net:80 check
(Obviously these are not the URLs I am talking to, this is just an example)
Haproxy is able to check the external applications and routes traffic to them:
In the safe environment of the company I work at I have to use a proxy and haproxy is unable to connect to the external applications.
How can I enable haproxy to use those external web application servers behind a http proxy (no authentication needed) while providing access to them through a common http page / via browser ?
How about to use delegate ( http://delegate.org/documents/ ) for this, just as an idea.
haproxy -> delegate -f -vv -P127.0.0.1:8081 PROXY=<your-proxy>
http://delegate9.org/delegate/Manual.shtml?PROXY
I know it's not that elegant but it could work.
I have tested this setup with a local squid and this curl call
echo 'GET http://www.php.net/' |curl -v telnet://127.0.0.1:8081
The curl call simluates the haproxy tcp call.
I was intrigued to make it work but i really could not find anything in the haproxy documentation, so i googled a bit and found that nginx might do the trick, but it didn't for me, after a bit more of googleing i ended up finding a configuration for apache that works.
here is the important part:
Listen 80
SSLProxyEngine on
ProxyPass /example/ https://www.example.com/
ProxyPassReverse /example/ https://www.example.com/
ProxyRemote https://www.example.com/ http://corporateproxy:port
ProxyPass /google/ https://www.google.com/
ProxyPassReverse /google/ https://www.google.com/
ProxyRemote https://www.google.com/ http://corporateproxy:port
i'm quite sure there should be a way to translate this configuration to nginx and even to haproxy... if i manage to find the time i will update the answer with my findings.
for apache to work you should also enable a few modules, i put up a github repository with a basic docker configuration that showcases feel free to have a look at that to see the full working configuration.
So I have spinnaker running behind an https load balancer and my external ports use the standard 443 which get port mapped to the spinnaker instance still on port 9000. I've gotten pretty much everything to work except a redirect from gate is still appending the :9000 port to my URL.
requests sent to https://my.url.com/gate/auth/redirect?to=https://my.url.com/#/infrastructure send back a redirect response with the location header in the 301 location:https://my.url.com:9000/gate/login which fails because the load balancer is only listening for 443. If I manually delete the port and go right to https://my.url.com/gate/login the oauth flow works as expected and once authed all deck functionality and subsequent gate queries work as expected.
In my /etc/default/spinnaker file I have
SPINNAKER_DECK_BASEURL=https://my.url.com
SPINNAKER_GATE_BASEURL=https://my.url.com/gate
in /opt/spinnaker/config/gate-googleOAuth.yml I have
spring:
oauth2:
client:
preEstablishedRedirectUri: ${SPINNAKER_GATE_BASEURL}/login
useCurrentUri: false
and I've ran /opt/spinnaker/bin/reconfigure_spinnaker.sh plus restarts to make sure deck and gate get updated. Does anyone have any ideas what I might be missing?
I figured out my problem. With the help of this issue pointing me in the right direction (https://github.com/spinnaker/spinnaker/issues/1112) and some digging I found that the issue was with apache2 and the reverse proxy back to gate.
ProxyPassReverse
This directive lets Apache httpd adjust the URL in the Location, Content-Location
and URI headers on HTTP redirect responses. This is essential when Apache httpd
is used as a reverse proxy (or gateway) to avoid bypassing the reverse proxy because
of HTTP redirects on the backend servers which stay behind the reverse proxy.
from apache2 documentation https://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxypassreverse
I have two components to my application, an API server (which is shared between several versions of the app), and static asset servers for the different distributions (mobile/desktop). I am using HAproxy to make the API server and the static asset servers behave as though they are on the same domain (to prevent CORS nastiness). My static asset servers are on CloudFront. Eventually, the HTML will reference the cloudfront URLs for the assets it depends on (to leverage global distribution). Temporarily for ease, I'm just having everything go through HAProxy. I'm having a hard time, however, getting HAProxy to send stuff properly to cloudfront.
My backend definition looks like this:
backend music_static
http-request set-header Host <hash>.cloudfront.net
option httpclose
server cloudfront <hash>.cloudfront.net
I figured that by setting the Host header value, I would be "spoofing" things correctly on their way to CloudFront. Obviously, visiting .cloudfront.net behaves exactly as I expect.
You probably moved over from this issue, but I see its not answered yet.
One solution to this issue is to enable SNI on CloudFront (this cost money, but worked for me - http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/DeveloperGuide/SecureConnections.html). The above Host header doesnt help, as HTTP Host header is sent after TCP handshake, and to support SNI CloudFront requires host details in TCP handshake.
I'm building a RESTful API which is only accessible by TLS. Where should SSL connection be implemented?
by RESTful API itself, my API is written in golang, which handles SSL easily.
by a SSL reverse proxy, here I'm using nginx.
I would prefer 2nd approach because nginx handles caching and static deliveries better.
Should I implement my API HTTP-only now? In my opinion the system is secure, as long as nginx the reverse proxy is serving SSL only and my API exposes itself to nginx only.
I'm not sure if there is a 3rd approach, while I keep my API SSL only and nginx passes through all requests transparently.
TL;DR: I will choose between the 2nd or 3rd option, depending on the scenario. If you want to publish the API on Internet, never opt for the first one.
The most secure option is the third one: implement your API to allow SSL connections only, and publish to Internet using a reverse proxy anyway.
The pros are the communication with your API will be secure even for internal connections. That will give you protection from internal attackers. The cons are the extra processing load on your server to manage the SSL security and that can impact on the performance.
Anyway, you should look for cost-benefit. That's the reason why it will depend on the scenario. For example, if your API will not be accessed by internal users, but only for internal services, and the load on the server is heavy, you can consider the 2nd approach: plain HTTP por internal communications and SSL termination for Internet.
I've got a problem accessing futon interface when it is proxied using nginx.
This config works fine when http protocol is used, but when I try to use
https, I constantly receive no_db_file errors (but operations succeed,
e.g. I can create databases, insert values, etc.)
location / {
proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:5984;
}
What can I do to make it work correctly using https protocol?
I have used Apache proxying to proxy https to http to do https on CouchDB: http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Apache_As_a_Reverse_Proxy
I have found that a trailing slash on the URL affects whether or not https proxying works. Maybe it affects Nginx the same way?
That's not bad! At least you have a working link between nginx and CouchDB.
no_db_file is CouchDB's 404 response when a database (the first thing after the slash) is not there. Check the logs and see what path CouchDB actually received in the query. It may be one of the AJAX calls that Futon does; but whatever it is, the logs will say.