delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
X-Received: | by 10.204.150.218 with SMTP id z26mr33473322bkv.95.1357679103283; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 13:05:03 -0800 (PST) |
Message-ID: | <50EC89FD.8050702@gmail.com> |
Date: | Tue, 08 Jan 2013 22:05:01 +0100 |
From: | doesniedoen <doesniedoen AT gmail DOT com> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: Problem with HTTPS in LWP module in Perl - solution |
In-Reply-To: | <CAKChYSqz8PXYhF3azLRVe=BcAQOC1ZnwzjLAxn7EWw-qKn398w at mail dot gmail dot com> |
References: | <CAKChYSqz8PXYhF3azLRVe=BcAQOC1ZnwzjLAxn7EWw-qKn398w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Unsubscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
FYI, I ran into the same problem, did some wiresharking, and figured out what the differences are between a successful handshake (Firefox) and the failure (LWP using SSLeay/openssl). I'm not too familiar with SSL/TLS etc, but it turns out that the cipher list is way larger using openssl (64 suites) than with Firefox (36 suites). I figure the order and presence of some ciphers is the cause: the actual cipher used is TLS_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA, which is present in both cases. Also the TLS version used (1.0 for Firefox, 1.2 for openssl) does not make a difference. The following code allows for a successful transaction with https://www.geocaching.com. The solution is in the SSL_cipher_list: $ perl -e '$ENV{PERL_NET_HTTPS_SSL_SOCKET_CLASS}="IO::Socket::SSL";\ use IO::Socket::SSL; IO::Socket::SSL::set_defaults(SSL_cipher_list => "RC4-SHA");\ use LWP::UserAgent; print LWP::UserAgent->new()->request(\ HTTP::Request->new(GET=>"https://www.geocaching.com"))->content;' However this includes only the one cipher (and TLS_EMPTY_RENEGOTIATION_INFO_SCSV). Expanding to all SHA ciphers, the following filter must be used: 'SHA:!NULL:!3DES:!DES:!ADH:!SRP' Finally, this is the filter with a relatively broad scope, and again all exclusions are required: 'ALL:!3DES:!DES:!ADH:!SRP:!AESGCM:!SHA256:!SHA384' When any of these excluded ciphers/hashes are present in the Client Hello negotiation packet, there is no response from the server besides a TCP ACK. Note that, for instance, '!3DES' also filters out ciphers that use 3DES as an encoding (I guess) and not as the main cipher, such as TLS_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA, who's presence in the handshake is not problematic. I figure that servers that do not respond at the TLS/SSL level when they see a client offering certain capabilities have their reasons for doing so, for a 'rep scasw' can't be that buggy. Yours sincerely, Kenney Westerhof -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |