cannot target 443(8443) on ALB - amazon-web-services

I'm trying to deploy my spring boot in https using ec2, Route 53.
When I try to set ALB's target groups to register for port 443, it failed in health check.
I opened 443 in security group which apply to ALB, also VPC's network ACL.
So I googled it and found out that "even though 443 is opened, if no one's listening to port 443, then connection to 443 will fail". Reading this comment, I decided to run springboot on port 443.
So I've changed application.properties to use 443 and also shell script file in charge of deploying to use 443. But it didn't work, server couldn't run on 443.
There was no other process on 443, my firewall setting is opened to 443 too.
After some googling, Someone told me "one some *nix system, 1 to 1024 ports can only be used by root previlege..." So, I changed settings and run my springboot on 8443 , finally succeeded.
But when I try to register target to 8443 it also returns unhealthy, even though I opened 8443 on security group, and there is one process listening to 8443.
I'm kind of lost here.
Is my approach is wrong? what can I do to make it healthy?
I bought domain on other site.
Got SSL Certification from ACM.
Added this SSL as CNAME into Route53 record.
Feeling embarrassed because i'm beginner in aws, also not completly understanding what i am doing.
Right now I'm just thinking making target healthy would solve the problem..
Any references that will help me getting out of this problem would be really helpful. thanks.

Related

AWS target group is unhealthy

I’m in trouble with aws ALB setting.
When I set target group to listen 80 port with path “/“ it returns unhealthy.
My apache web server is running, and I make index.html file on path “/var/lib/www/html”.
But when I start my tomcat service with port 8080 it works. It returns healthy.
I don’t know why.. anyone have answer for this?

How to use Amazon ALB port forwarding to run multiple services on a single EC2 instance

I have multiple services running on multiple ports on a single AWS EC2 instances. I've been using two ALBs to run these services, but I'd like to combine them into a single ALB that forwards to the correct service based on the host name. One service is a node app running port 80 and the other is a flask app running on port 5001.
As of now, I have a target group setup as mywebsite for the node app on port 80, and api-service for my flask app on port 5001.
I added those target groups to an ALB, my-alb, and set up forwarding rules so that port 80 and 5001 will forward to port 443. On port 443 I set up forwarding rules so that if the host matches api.* it will forward to the target group api-service otherwise it will default to my-website.
I have also set up my alb as the alias for api.mywebsite.com and www.mywebsite.com on route 53 as well as setting up the certificate. All the health checks are passing for both my target groups.
Here's the issue:
www.mywebsite.com works properly. I get forwarded to the https version of the site and everything looks fine. When I try to use api.mywebsite.com it doesn't load and I get a 504 Bad Gateway error.
To summarize, here are the steps I've completed:
Setup two target groups for my services on port 80 and 5001
Added those two target groups to ALB and set routing rules to redirect to port 443
Set forwarding rules for route 443 to forward to the service on port 5001 if the host matches api.* else route to the service on port 80.
Set the ALB as the alias for api.mywebsite.com and www.mywebsite.comin route 53.
Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
EDIT: Got it working.
I had configured my security group incorrectly. That is the step I was missing :D. Once I added port 5001 to the security group assigned to my ALB and EC2 it began to work properly.
Thanks!

AWS public DNS for ubuntu instance is not accessible from the browser

I am relatively new to AWS and I've been looking at quite a few tutorials for the past couple of days trying to figure out how to make my AWS ubuntu instance accessible from the browser.
What I've done:
1st: I configured security groups to accept all traffic for ssh, http, https just to see if the public DNS listed in the instance is accessible.
2nd: I changed the IP of my instance to an elastic IP
3rd: I wrote a simple node.js file that listens on port: 9000 and console.logs 'hello world'
For some reason ssh works, and I can run my node.js file, but agina I cannot access the remote instance from the browser.
Any help would be greatly appreciated since I've been on this for a couple of days
Thanks!
Thank you everyone for the quick responses!
My issue was I did not include a TCP rule to my specific port. Now I am able to access that port via ec2-DNSNAME:9123.
And, just to clarify, if I want to host that DNS for all traffic I should specify 'anywhere' for the TCP rule, correct?
I configured security groups to accept all traffic for ssh, http, https
In security groups, "HTTP" does not mean "HTTP on any port"... it means "any traffic on TCP port 80" -- 80 being the standard IANA assigned port for HTTP.
Security groups are not aware of the type of traffic you are passing, only the IP protocol (e.g. TCP, UDP, ICMP, GRE, etc.) and port number (for protocols that use port numbers) and any protocol specific information (ICMP message types).
You need a rule allowing traffic to port 9000.
Firstly go to your EC2 and see if curl http://localhost works..
Also, if you are exposing your nodejs on port 9000 ; did u open 9000 also on security groups or not ?
Few things to check:
Security groups
Subnet NACLS (these can function as a subnet level
firewall, but unless you've messed with these they should allow all
traffic.)
On the server if you run netstat -na | grep <PORT> do you see your
application listening on the correct ports?
You may also check your system for a firewalls that could be short circuiting the requests.
If the above doesn't point you towards where your issue is you can grab tcpdump and filter it just for requests coming from your web browser (e.g after installing tcpdump -vvn host 10.20.30.40 port 8000 Substitute your ip and port). This will let you know if you're running into a network issue (Packets aren't reaching the server) or if its something with the app.
I'd also recommend using IP addresses while doing your initial troubleshooting. That way we can establish it is not network/server configuration before going into DNS.

AWS Ubuntu instance as proxy

I'm not sure why my browser is timing out when I try to connect to my AWS Ubuntu Instance squid proxy
I want to have my AWS Ubuntu instance act as a proxy for my python requests. The requests I make in my program will hit my AWS proxy and my proxy will return to me the webpage. The proxy is acting as a middleman. I am running squid in this Ubuntu instance. This instance is also within a VPC.
The VPC security group inbound traffic is currently set to
HTTP, TCP, 80, 0.0.0.0/0
SSH, TCP, 22, 0.0.0.0/0
RDP, TCP, 3389, 0.0.0.0/0
HTTPS, TCP, 443, 0.0.0.0/0
and outbound traffic is open to all traffic
This is my current squid configuration is the default squid.conf except that I changed one line to
http_access allow all meaning traffic is open to all.
However when I changed my mozilla browser to use the Ubuntu instance's Public IP and squid.conf default port of 3128, I cannot see any traffic going through my proxy using this command on the ubuntu instance
tail -f /var/log/squid/access.log
My browser actually times out when I try to connect to a website such as google.com. I am following this tutorial but I cannot get the traffic logs that his person is getting.
HTTP/S as shown in security group settings actually has nothing whatsoever to do with HTTP/S.
Many port numbers have assigned names. When you see "HTTP," here, it's only an alias that means "whatever stuff happens on TCP port 80." The list of values only inludes common services and the names aren't always precise compared the official port names, but the whole point is to give neophytes a word that nakes sense.
What should I change? I always thought I should be leaving HTTP/S ports to their default values.
That is not at all what this does. As already inferable from above, changing an "HTTP" rule from port 80 to something else does not change the value for the HTTP port on instances behind it. Changing the port value makes the rule no longer be an "HTTP" rule, since HTTP is just a friendly label which means "this rule is for TCP port 80."
You need a custom TCP rule allowing port 3128 from your IP, and that's it.
You need to add 3128 as custom TCP in your SG. This will allow Squid to send/ receive traffic.
Also as a best practice, make SSH accessible from your own IP rather than public.

amazon ec2 elastic ip redirecting not wroking

I've registered domain with bigrock.in
Created ec2 instance in aws
created elastic ip
registered with route53 and gave my domain name
changed the name servers in bigrock with the provided names in bigrock
ssh to the ec2 instance with elastic ip
ran node.js app with forever
with the following environemnt variables
export ROOT_URL="www.domain.com"
at the time of route53 process, I created A record with www sub-domain to elasticIp
But, I'm not seeing anything at domain.com or at elasticIp xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
Did I miss any steps, Is there anything wrong I did or do I need to do anything to make this works
EDIT
I haven't added any A or CNAME records to bigrock just changed the name server to the servers provided by ROuter53
Edit 2
that is my security group outbound details, My app is running on port 80.
Are those settings correct?
EDIT 3
My INbound rules
You've got a rule to allow all traffic from anywhere on the INBOUND security groups so its not that (make sure you fix this later when you get it working - as it is, its a bit of a security hole).
Next thing I would normally say is its a dns problem, but as you say you've tried going to the eip as well as the domain name its not that either.
Next likely candidates are:
The server isnt listening - it may be that it hasnt started properly try checking the logs,The machine's firewall is blocking connections. (try turning it off - keep this at VERY short time length though - its a huge risk in combination with your security group settings)
Or your server is not listening on port 80, e.g. it might be listening on 8080 or 443. Check the server config - by default browsers assume port 80 for http, if its not listening on that you will have to specify the port in the address bar as well e.g. http://example.com:8080