I'm using PHPStorm 7 to create a RESTful API. I wanted to use the built in REST Client but need to be able to tell it to allow untrusted SSL Certificates. I am using a self signed certificate on my test server.
At the moment when I send my request I get this response.
javax.net.ssl.SSLPeerUnverifiedException: peer not authenticated
Is there an option I can change to ignore this?
I would recommend creating your own Certificate Authority (CA) and generate certificates for your server(s) signed by it.
You then have to add the CA public certificate to your local machine (probably into the Java store, and into Internet Explorer settings (if you're using Windows that is)).
Creating Your Own SSL Certificate Authority (and Dumping Self Signed Certs)
Custom SSL Certificate Authority?
Related
I am working on some 3rd party integration project.
Created RootCA and SubCA from their official documentation website and after importing in windows server, we created key using openssl and got signed certificate from 3rd party integration Support team
We have configured in ldp.exe client and it got connected and fetched the dataset.
Now we are implementing in PHP code level.
We have:
IIS server 10
PHP 7.2
PHP Code is working in IIS
Added ldap.conf file created c:/openldap/sysconf/ldap.conf
TLS_REQCERT allow
#TLS_CACERT c:\openldap\sysconf\RootCaSha1.der
TLS_CACERT c:\openldap\sysconf\SubCaSha1.der
#TLS_CACERTDIR c:\openldap\sysconf
We have tried various paths and noted all evidence via wireshark tool
It says TLSv1.2 Alert (Level: Fatal, Description: Handshake Failure) so it means some certificate in ldap.conf are not as per requirement.
Looking forward to help in this regard so we can get connect.
Thanks in advance
As far as I know, the TLS handshake failure error commonly occurred when the server’s certificate is configured improperly. this should be configured on the IIS server-side. Please check the below items.
The account running the website is supposed to own the right of accessing the private key of the certificate. Firstly import the certificate to the Local machine Certification Store, under the property page of the certificate, grant the account access to the private key of the certificate.
Subsequently, we specify the certificate in the IIS site binding module.
Besides, Please note that the communication between the client-side and the server-side is established based on the fact that the client trusts the server certificate. this means that when we visit the website, the browser address bar has the sign of security lock. In this way, the public key of the certificate can be exchanged. The specific operation is to add the server root certificate to the Trusted Root Certificate Authority certification store of the client-side.
I am trying to redirect to a server that does Client authentication and establishes an https connection in php. I am using the following command:
header('Location:https://example.com');
But I cannot figure out how to send the client certificate in this redirect. without sending the certificate I cannot connect with the server. How can I attach the client certificate in the redirect?
But I cannot figure out how to send the client certificate in this redirect.
You do not. Certificate are send by httpd much earlier (this phase of the protocol is called "handshake") than client and server start talking about dealing with your scripts (see: How HTTPS actually works). You must set up correctly your httpd, install certificate and private key and perhaps certificate authority of certificate issuer (or your own CA if you are playing with self signed certs). There're lot of posts on the net about doing that, so google.
I have a SSL enabled eCommerce website which uses cURL for payment processing. Everything is running well but recently I learned about "CA Public Certification Bundle for cUrl" that its a good idea to use it for cURL connections.
If this is true than can someone tell me how or how is it better/different than using the standard SSL?
Doesn't the SSL already provide some kind of certification for all connections?
Any HTTPS client connected to an HTTPS server will get its certificate (in fact, it can be a certificate chain). This server certificate must then verified by the client to authenticate the server.
This is normally done by using a number of CA certificates that are configured on the client as trust anchors (i.e. this is what you trust in advance, before encountering the server certificate). The client tries build a chain between the last element of the server chain and one of the CA certificates in its trust anchors. If there is such a valid chain the server certificate is trusted.
A "CA certificate bundle" would be a set of trust anchors. You can build your own by looking for CAs you're willing to trust, or you can use an existing bundle. Most OSes or browser come with an existing bundle. cURL in itself doesn't but it can rely on a pre-defined location (set at compile time) or it also suggests to use the Firefox bundle (via a conversion mechanism). (You can override default setting via extra options, on the command line or via the API.)
Certificate Pinning (which you also mention) has nothing to do with a CA cert bundle. In fact, it's almost the opposite. Instead of relying on 3rd party trust anchors (the certification authorities), you explicitly "pin" a set of server certificates you know as directly trusted. They're not used to verify other certificates, instead, you compare the certificate you get with the exact certificate you're expecting for that host (or at least you compare public keys). This is more like having a reference mapping from server name to certificate (or to public key) and comparing what you get from that host with the reference you have. Of course, this can only work for a reasonably small set of certificates in practice, unlike the CA (PKI) approach which is designed to let you authenticate parties you have never encountered before (via a 3rd party: the CA).
How is it better/different than using the standard SSL?
Doesn't the SSL already provide some kind of certification for all connections?
Using a CA certificate bundle isn't different than using "standard SSL", it is what's commonly used for SSL/TLS connections. You often don't see it because that CA bundle is often supplied with your client (or with the OS).
Note that strictly speaking, this is orthogonal to SSL/TLS itself, which mainly just says you should authenticate the server. Certificate verification (the PKI way, via CA certificates) is defined in a different specification, also complemented by a specification on how to verify the name in the certificate (and the HTTPS specification of course).
Found a great answer here. The comment above really helped. The exact keyword I was looking for was "Certificate Pinning".
Using this page: Wamp2 and "The ordinal 942 could not be located in the dynamic link library LIBEAY.dll"
I was able to setup SSL on my wamp. It works nice, especially after I provide the server certificate (server.crt) to an user. If not, they will have an "certificate not trusted" error. It is possible to reject those who are not using SSL certificate?
Thank you!
If the client displays a "server certificate is not trusted" message, that's because the server certificate you have installed is not signed by any authority the client knows about. Likely you're using a self-signed certificate. When you add this certificate to the trusted certificate store on your client, the client now trusts this certificate and does not display the warning anymore. It's not that "the client uses a certificate", it's that the client doesn't complain about the server's certificate.
You have no influence over this process at all. The server offers its certificate, and the client trusts it or doesn't. The server doesn't know this. If the client continues its conversation with the server, that pretty much implies that it trusts the offered certificate. Whether that is because the user approved it manually or because the client trusts the certificate otherwise, the server doesn't know.
There's also the concept of client certificates, in which a client identifies itself to the server using a certificate. This is badly supported in todays client software though and probably not what you're looking for.
Is it possible to authenticate a web browser using an ssl certificate.
Say i store a private key in my application, is there any way to read a key from a browser and try to authenticate based on that?
You can authenticate a browser/user using SSL/TLS client-certificate authentication.
The client certificate must be requested by the server, so you'd need access to the server configuration (not just installing some PHP code on a shared server). This is done at the SSL/TLS layer (in fact, the mechanism is not specific to HTTPS): the server requests the client-certificate during the SSL/TLS handshake (sometimes via a renegotiated handshake). In Apache Httpd, this is typically done via SSLVerifyClient (although you'll need to specify other options too).
The server will then verify the certificate against the CAs you've configured it with (possibly your own, and possibly independent of the CAs used for the server certificate itself). (Alternatively, you could disable certificate verification at the server level in some cases, and have the PHP application do it, but this is a bit more advanced and you'd need to know what you're doing.)
You can access the client certificate from your application and obtains its Subject DN (or alternative names), to identify the client.
It's not clear whether you're after identifying a browser or a user. In the end, everything goes through the browser anyway, but client certificates tend to be allocated to users. Users would have to install that certificate into their browser.
EDIT: For further details, it would help if you could clarify your question and what you intend to do with this.
Is it possible to authenticate a web browser using an ssl certificate.
Say i store a private key in my application, is there any way to read
a key from a browser and try to authenticate based on that?
Firstly, strictly speaking, there's no such thing as an "SSL certificate", since multiple types of certificates can be used for SSL/TLS, and some of these same certificates can also be used for other purposes than SSL/TLS. Typically, "SSL certificate" means "X.509 certificate in the context of SSL/TLS".
Therefore, authenticating a web browser using an SSL certificate implies doing it at the SSL/TLS layer. (There have been attempts to implement message-level security using X.509 certificates at the HTTP layer, but they're not widely supported by browsers.)
Secondly, the private key is held by the remote party that you authenticate. The local party that authenticates the remote party doesn't see any private key. If you (as a server) want to authenticate a web browser, it's the browser that needs to have the private key, not your (presumably PHP) application. In this context, it's not quite clear why your (PHP?) application would have/need a private key if it's the browser that you want to authenticate.
What your verifying application may need (if it's not done by the server itself) is a CA certificate to be able to verify the client certificate it is presented with (or at least some form of trust anchors with which to verify the client certificate). There's no private key required here, just public keys and certificates, unless you want your application to be a CA too.
Indeed, you could have your application be a mini CA. It could make the browser generate a key-pair and send a certificate request to the server (there are mechanisms to have a web page make the browser do all that). Then the server would generate the certificate and make the browser import it back against its private key. Subsequently, the browser could use this certificate for authentication with that server (or other servers that would recognise these certificates).
No, you cannot do that.
There is some development going on, and a few day ago W3C has made a proposal for a encryption standard.
You can however put a key in a cookie and use that to identify. This is the default PHP session id behavior.