secure connection conflict between HTTPS and HTTP protocols on different hosting platforms - http

I am facing a secure connection conflict as some of my videos are hosted on Kaltura (http) while the site is hosted on Heroku (HTTPS). Can you guys/girls advise on how to resolve this conflict?

You can make a proxy in your Heroku backend. The steps would be:
The video request is sent through HTTPS protocol to the proxy.
The proxy receive the request, parse it, and fetch corresponding video through HTTP from Kaltura.
The proxy return video data to browser.

Related

Trouble making http request from lighttpd server to pm2 server

Background:
I have my personal website running on a lighttpd server on my raspberry pi. I have that server’s port (80) forwarded so it can be accessed publicly.
I’m in the process of making a project, and I want a node.js service to make requests to from the lighttpd server. I set up pm2 so the node.js server is always running. I have that port forwarded too (5000). I've verified that this server is working via postman and the browser
Problem:
I'm receiving the following error when making requests:
has been blocked by CORS policy: The request client is not a secure context and the resource is in more-private address space private.
Of note; I have Access-Control-Allow-Private-Network:true in the response header and Access-Control-Request-Private-Network:true in the request header. The only other solution I've found that might fix this is getting an SSL cert for the lighttpd server and using https for it, however I'm struggling setting that up to see if it would work
Questions:
Would getting an SSL cert for lighttpd allow me to make requests to my pm2 server?
Is there a different solution?
How secure is this setup? I don't expect a lot of traffic...

How to handle https requests to a local http server

We are implementing an application that uses ssl certificate (https), and the application could be used to send printing requests to intelligent printers on local network of the user, the problem is, our website uses http(s) and it sends http requests to the printers, but chrome blocks the request stating that we cannot send http requests from an https website, how to get around that ?
There is an option to enable ssl certificate, but i am not sure how will this identify a server/printer on the local network, because AFAIK ssl is tied to domains. does that i mean that i need a static ip for the printer ? if that's the case, how will i be able to send requests to the printer if the internet is down ?
I am wondering how Odoo solves this problem in their application, because they send requests to printers too.

Sending http request behind nginx

I am not sure how to formulate my question but here we go:
I have 2 servers, one is the nginx reverse proxy and one is the app server.
In my app server, I am developing a simple http client using jerseyclient that will send a request to another server. I can do this now but the traffic goes from the app server and directly to the destination. Is it possible to it from the app server, passes through the reverse proxy server and goes to the destination?
And, is this design ok or is it an abomination?
nginx reverse proxy works only for requests outside your network.
To configure your system works as you described you have to configure firewall NAT or caching HTTP proxy like squid etc.
If you have no reasons why your servers should look as single computer - your configuration is OK.

Can I whitelist a domain for unencrypted traffic from a page served over HTTPS?

I've got an internal web application that's designed to work in concert with a server running locally on the client machine. (For the curious: the local server is used to decrypt data retrieved from the server using the client machine's GPG key.)
The internal web app is served over HTTPS while the local app is accessible via localhost. It used to be that I could make unencrypted AJAX requests from the page to localhost without any issues; but it seems that recently Chrome was updated to disallow HTTP requests to any destination from pages served over HTTPS.
I understand that in the vast majority of cases, HTTP requests from a page served via HTTPS constitute a security hole. However, since I have complete control over the endpoint in this case (i.e., localhost), it seems to me that it should still be perfectly safe to make HTTP requests to that one destination even when the host page has been served via HTTPS.
Is this possible? To whitelist localhost somehow?
Since you are in control of both the client and the server, it sounds like a good candidate for Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS). The server will have to set a few response headers to give access to the client. You can learn more here: http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/cors/

Pros and cons of using a Http proxy v/s https proxy?

The JVM allows proxy properties http.proxyHost and http.proxyPort for specifying a HTTP proxy server and https.proxyHost and https.proxyPort for specifying a HTTPS proxy server .
I was wondering whether there are any advantages of using a HTTPS proxy server compared to a HTTP proxy server ?
Is accessing a https url via a HTTPS proxy less cumbersome than accesing it from a HTTP proxy ?
HTTP proxy gets a plain-text request and [in most but not all cases] sends a different HTTP request to the remote server, then returns information to the client.
HTTPS proxy is a relayer, which receives special HTTP request (CONNECT verb) and builds an opaque tunnel to the destination server (which is not necessarily even an HTTPS server). Then the client sends SSL/TLS request to the server and they continue with SSL handshake and then with HTTPS (if requested).
As you see, these are two completely different proxy types with different behavior and different design goals. HTTPS proxy can't cache anything as it doesn't see the request sent to the server. With HTTPS proxy you have a channel to the server and the client receives and validates server's certificate (and optionally vice versa). HTTP proxy, on the other hand, sees and has control over the request it received from the client.
While HTTPS request can be sent via HTTP proxy, this is almost never done because in this scenario the proxy will validate server's certificate, but the client will be able to receive and validate only proxy's certificate, and as name in the proxy's certificate will not match the address the socket connected to, in most cases an alert will be given and SSL handshake won't succeed (I am not going into details of how to try to address this).
Finally, as HTTP proxy can look into the request, this invalidates the idea of security provided by HTTPS channel, so using HTTP proxy for HTTPS requests is normally done only for debugging purposes (again we omit cases of paranoid company security policies which require monitoring of all HtTPS traffic of company employees).
Addition: also read my answer on the similar topic here.
There are no pros or cons.
And there are no "HTTPS proxy" server.
You can tell the protocol handlers which proxy server to use for different protocols. This can be done for http, https, ftp and socks. Not more and not less.
I can't tell you if you should use a different proxy for https connections or not. It depends.
I can only explain the difference of an http and https request to a proxy.
Since the HTTP Proxy (or web proxy) understands HTTP (hence the name), the client can just send the request to the proxy server instead of the actual destenation.
This does not work for HTTPS.
This is because the proxy can't make the TLS handshake, which happens at first.
Therefore the client must send a CONNECT request to the proxy.
The proxy establishes a TCP connection and just sends the packages forth and back without touching them.
So the TLS handshake happens between the client and destenation.
The HTTP proxy server does not see everything and does not validate destenation servers certificate whatsoever.
There can be some confusion with this whole http, https, proxy thing.
It is possible to connect to a HTTP proxy with https.
In this case, the communication between the client and the proxy is encrypted.
There are also so called TLS terminating or interception proxy servers like Squid's SSL Peek and Splice or burp, which see everything.
But this should not work out of the box, because the proxy uses own certificates which are not signed by trusted CAs.
References
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/net/proxies.html
https://parsiya.net/blog/2016-07-28-thick-client-proxying---part-6-how-https-proxies-work/
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/secure-web-proxy
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2817#section-5
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7231#section-4.3.6
If you mean connecting to a HTTP proxy server over TLS by saying HTTPS proxy, then
I was wondering whether there are any advantages of using a HTTPS
proxy server compared to a HTTP proxy server ?
The advantage is that your client's connection to proxy server is encrypted. E.g. A firewall can't not see which host you use CONNECT method connect to.
Is accessing a https url via a HTTPS proxy less cumbersome than
accesing it from a HTTP proxy ?
Everything is the same except that with HTTPS proxy, brower to proxy server connection is encrypted.
But you need to deploy a certificate on your proxy server, like how a https website does, and use a pac file to configure the brower to enable Connecting to a proxy over SSL.
For more details and a practical example, check my question and answer here HTTPs proxy server only works in SwitchOmega
Unfortunately, "HTTPS proxy" has two distinct meanings:
A proxy that can forward HTTPS traffic to the destination. This proxy itself is using an HTTP protocol to set up the forwarding.
In case the browser is trying to connect to a website using HTTPS, the browser will send a CONNECT request to the proxy, and the proxy will set up a TCP connection with the website and mirror all TCP traffic sent on the connection from the browser to the proxy onto the connection between the proxy and the website, and similarly mirror the response TCP packet payload from the webite to the connection with the browser. Hypothetically, the same mechanism using CONNECT could be used with HTTP traffic, but practically speaking browsers don't do that. For HTTP traffic, they send the actual HTTP request to the proxy, including the full path in the HTTP command (as well as setting the Host header): https://stackoverflow.com/a/38259076/10026
So, by this definition, HTTPS Proxy is a proxy that understands the CONNECT directive and can support HTTPS traffic going between the browser and the website.
A proxy that uses HTTPS protocol to secure client communication.
In this mode (sometimes referred to as "Secure Proxy"), the browser uses the proxy's own certificate to perform TLS handshake with the proxy, and then sends either HTTP or HTTPS traffic, (including CONNECT requests), on that connection as per (1). So, the connection between the browser and the proxy is always protected with a TLS key derived using the proxy's certificate, regardless of whether the traffic itself is encrypted with a key negotiated between the browser and the website. If HTTPS traffic is proxied via a secure proxy, it is double-encrypted on the connection between the browser and the proxy.
For example, the Proxy Switcher Chrome plugin has two separate settings to control each of these funtionalities:
As of 2022, the option to use a secure proxy is not available in MacOS and Windows manual proxy configuration UI. But a secure proxy may be specified in a PAC file used in automatic proxy configuration using the HTTPS proxy directive. It is up to the consuming application to support the HTTPS directive; most major browsers, except Safari, and many desktop apps support it.
NOTE: Things get a bit more complicated because some proxies that proxy HTTPS traffic don't simply forward TCP packet payload, as described in (1), but act as Intercepting Proxies. Using a spoofed website certificate, they effectively perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack (well, it's not necessarily an attack because it's expected behavior). Whereas the browser thinks it's using the website's certificate to set up a TLS tunnel with a website, it's actually using a spoofed certificate to set up TLS tunnel with the proxy, and the proxy sets up the TLS tunnel with the website. Then proxy has visibility into the HTTPS requests/responses. But all of that is completely orthogonal to whether the proxy is acting as a secure proxy as per (2).

Resources