My application is based on Spring framework and is used to transmit very confidential data.During testing of the application with with proxy tools like Fiddler, Paros Proxy etc. it was found that these tools are intercepting the request data, and data is easily modified before reaching the server.
My application is not currently not integrated with SSL . We will implement SSL /HTTPS. but is this because SSL has not been integrated ?
Is it normal for Proxy tools to intercept the data from a web application with out HTTPS ?
There are two things here.
1) If you don't use SSL the communication is not encrypted, which means that anybody who is able to intercept the traffic, will be able to see the content. You don't necessarily need a proxy for that.
2) With an intercepting HTTP proxy you can see SSL encrypted traffic as well. What the proxy does is building two separate SSL tunnels one between the server and the proxy and one between the client and the proxy. This way the proxy itself can see the whole traffic. Of course the proxy can only provide a fake SSL certificate which will trigger a notification in the browser for the user, but he will probably ignore it.
Yes. If you don't use https, Proxy see everything that the application send or received.
To prevent that, you must use https.
To prevent sslstrip you must use HSTS.
Related
I have an application set up like this:
There is a server, with a reverseproxy/load balancer that acts as the HTTPS termination (this is the one that has a server certificate), and several applications behind it(*)
However, some applications require authentication of the client with a certificate. Authentication cannot happen in the reverse proxy. Will the application be able to see the user certificate, or will it be jettisoned by the HTTPS->HTTP transfer?
(*) OK, so this is a Kubernetes ingress, and containers/pods.
It will be lost. I think you need to extract it in the reverse proxy (i.e. Nginx) and pass it in as a HTTP header if you really must. See for example https://serverfault.com/questions/788895/nginx-reverse-proxy-pass-through-client-certificate. Not very secure as the cert is passed in the clear!
I don't know if we have that level of control over the ingress, personally I'm using a normal Nginx server for incoming traffic instead.
Is there a way to completely encrypt the outgoing HTTPS requests from the software to the server ? i mean there are apps like Charles and Fiddler that can capture the HTTPS traffic and see everything like the Headers,URL,...
i don not want anyone to see or capture the traffic going from my app.
i'm using Delphi 10.1 VCL App
If you're using HTTPS and you are properly validating certificates as a browser would, there is no way for an intermediate to view URLs or headers, or content. All they can see is which server you're communicating with.
The way Charles gets around this is that it presents its own non-genuine certificate, which won't validate, and proxies the communication. If your app is validating certificates it would refuse to communicate with the Charles proxy. If you viewed the Charles proxy with a web browser it would present an SSL certificate error.
If you trust that particular Charles proxy and want to add an exception in your client or browser, you can. But it only allows that particular one - it doesn't mean anyone else can intercept your HTTPS, or read URLs, etc, using their own Charles proxy or similar.
The question is about HTTP vs HTTPS.
If I want to anonymously load a website that forces HTTPS, like Google.com, do I need an HTTPS proxies, or can I get away with HTTP proxies?
If your proxy is SOCKS it will not care what kind of socket is connecting through it. It has its own handshake and it does not care about what happens after the handshake. Whether after the SOCKS handshake an SSL handshake (HTTPS) is started it is not a SOCKS proxy problem, it will just pass through.
Several HTTP proxies on the other hand expect HTTP headers to guide them, such a HTTP proxy will not allow HTTPS since it needs to read the headers.
On the third hand (ekhm... well, foot?), an HTTP proxy that supports HTTP CONNECT can also setup the transfer of arbitrary data. Therefore such a proxy can setup any type of socket, which can have an SSL handshake, which can then be used for HTTPS transfer.
HTTP Proxy Server supports CONNECT verb which supports HTTPS connections within HTTP Proxy. You don't need special HTTPS proxy server or any other setup.
CONNECT verb allows you to create binary socket tunnel to any given IP:Port address. So any HTTP client (all browsers), will open secure tunnel and communicate securely over proxy server. However, no one cant control or see anything that is going through the tunnel unless they implement man in middle attack by sending you self-signed certificates.
Most firewall these days automatically implement man in middle self signed certificates that are deployed in work network, so you have to probably dig more to identify whether it is really secure or not. So it may not be that anonymous.
If you're trying to access a service anonymously, you won't get this by running your own proxy. It's not clear from the original question what is meant by "proxy", e.g. local service, or remote service. You won't get anonymity by surfing through a proxy that's on your network, unless it's something like a TOR proxy which relays out through the TOR network.
As for whether proxies can support HTTPS or not, that's been covered here, it would be unusual to find a proxy that doesn't support CONNECT. However if it's a remote anonymizing service you're using, I doubt they would do MitM, since you'd need to install the signing cert into your trusted root store, so they couldn't do that surreptitiously.
As part of my job,
I need to intercept the communication between a native windows application to a web server.
My connection to the environment is through an SSL-VPN.
The application (.exe) is installed on my PC and is communicating in HTTPS with the web server over port 1912.
Usually I use Burp proxy in order to intercept the communication between a browser and a server (configuring the proxy through the browser config). Yet,
In this implementation (native windows application) I cannot figure out how to route the traffic to a proxy.
Is there any specific proxy or configuration which I can use in order to that and use Burp (because it is a web proxy.. I need to mess with HTTP requests)?
First thing you have to understand is whether this native application is programmed to use proxy. If it can use proxy, it could obtain proxy information from the Windows system or you might need to configure just for the application inside the application.
Other possibility it to use the default gateway, and redirect requests with HTTP response 3XX to your proxy. It might work depending on your native application. The default gateway might just act as a proxy.
I suppose here you are not talking about reverse proxy and forward proxy caching (https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/4.2.x/admin/reverse-proxy-http-redirects.en.html)
We have some legacy ASP.NET code that detects if a request is secure, and redirects to the https version of the page if required.
This code uses Request.ServerVariables["SERVER_PORT_SECURE"] to detect if SSL is needed.
Our operations team has suggested doing proxy SSL at the load balancer (F5 Big-IP) instead of on the web servers (assume for the purposes of this question that this is a requirement).
The consequence would be that all requests appear as HTTP to the web server.
My question: how can we let the web servers known that the incoming connection was secure before it hit the load balancer? Can we continue to use Request.ServerVariables["SERVER_PORT_SECURE"]?
Do you know of a load balancer config that will send headers so that no application code changes are needed?
Use an iRule to effectively add a custom element to the HTTP header and then detect it in the ASP.NET code via Request.Headers. Dig into the collection of the Request.Headers object as well as your F5 hardware may already be marking itself on one of the HTTP Headers anyway.