I am looking at two WSO2 client samples that call the user management web service. The first is a simple client, the second is a web app.
The first client sets the system SSL properties and then instantiates a WSUserStoreManager object.
The second one, the web app, does not set SSL properties at all, and instead instantiates a RemoteUserStoreManagerServiceStub.
Could someone please explain why these differences? What service to call when two similar are available (a regular and a 'remote' one)? Isn't it always necessary to set up the SSL properties when calling a https endpoint? Thanks.
if you are calling to HTTPS end point, you need to set the SSL trust store properties to trust the server. But it is under control of the client, If client wants, it can trust it, if not it can ignore. If you want to ignore, you want to override default TrustManager of java.
However, normally java has a trust store file called "cacerts" where it contains all trusted CA certificate. But WSO2IS server's certificate is a self signed one and java can not trust it. Therefore, if you want, you can import certificate in to the "cacerts file. I am not sure about why there are two different in client and web app. However, if you are calling HTTPS, trust must be created. Please check web app source more. Some time, it may have ignore the trust. As web app is run in a app server, sometime java SSL trust properties may have been set to correct file.
Related
I’m using wso2esb-4.9.0, then wso2-5.0.0, and now working on wso2ei-6.0.0
I would like to create a secured proxy service that could be used by different clients.
Required security is scenario 5 (sign and encrypt – x509 authentication) : Messages are encrypted using service (server) public certificate and signed using client private key. Since multiple client will use the service, each client should sign the message using client private key.
At the server side, the public certificate for each client should be already be in the trust store of the server.
At server side, I can do a hardcoded configuration for rampart in order to respond correctly for incoming request from client1 OR for client2. This means that, for now, the only solution I found in order to support 2 clients, for the same backend service, is through the use of two proxy service, each configured to verify the signature of exactly one client.
I would like to get advice or pointers in order to configure the server side in a dynamic way, where only one proxy service is used. This proxy service should be able to configure at run time correctly rampart, in order to decrypt and verify the signature of the incoming message (one proxy, for N clients).
Thanks,
So, in fact nothing extra needs to be done at configuration level of rampat, since the harcoded configuration is related to the server side, when it would like to consume smthg for other party.
Since the incomming request contains informations related to certificate data, server will dynamically check his keystore in order to verify the incomming signed message... so once again, just configure rampart, at service side, and at client side and let the magic happen.
thanks to wso2 team for great product suite !
I am new in the area of SOAP Based web services. I am using TomEE server. The server is a bit customized according to my organization's need.
Few days back, when I was trying to run the web services example from TomEE website, I was able to generate the wsdl and calling the web service by a client.
Now, when I need to use the customized version of TomEE plus (by the organization), I can see that the request does reach to the server and hence there is a log entry also but my #WebMethod is not getting executed.
Does any one has any idea about any configuration which can prevent the request from reaching to the webservice method? Is there any pointer around how can I debug further to reach out to the root cause of this issue?
Without further information about what is customized it's like fishing in the dark.
I would guess that perhaps the global web.xml or the server.xml of tomee server is changed so that some URI context mappings are not forwarded or ignored. But it's only a lucky tip.
Im working on some JSON-based web service that is supposed to work with Android application.
I would like to encrypt data transport between client (android) and server (virtual server in datacenter).
I don't have to make sure that my server is my server, just data encryption.
I have no idea how to use HTTPS.
Do I just put my PHP files in private_html and use https://example.com url?
To use HTTPS, you don't have to do anything in the coding of your web service - it's all in your hosting. Here the are steps you can follow. The specific instructions differ in your hosting (IIS, Apache, AWS/Azure, etc), but you can google specifics on how to accomplish any of these steps for whatever host and application framework you decide.
Buy an SSL certificate (there are many different vendors, but expect between $75-$200 for the certificate) based on the vendor, reputation, and level of security you need.
Generate a certificate signing request (CSR) from the server you'll be hosting.
Upload the CSR to the SSL vendor who will validate and provide the certificate for your use.
Import the SSL certificate into your application server, and configure the site to use the certificate. For instance, if you're hosting Microsoft IIS, you'd import the SSL certificate and then add HTTPS bindings on 443 to the specific website hosting your web service.
Another point of security. Since you are deploying SSL, you don't have to do any application level encryption (assuming you are not putting sensitive information in query strings - use POST if you think you need to). You probably would want to implement some security to restrict access to your web service so only your app can access it. Best practice is some level of OAuth, but at a minimum some type of pre-shared key in the header of the request is a lot better than nothing.
Here are some additional sites for more information:
https://www.digicert.com/ssl-certificate-installation.htm
https://support.godaddy.com/help/category/742/ssl-certificates-installing-ssl-certificates?prog_id=GoDaddy
If you don't want to pay for a certificate, you can use certificate signet by your own CA and add the root certificates into your application using HTTPClient and keystores
Here there's some guides
http://datacenteroverlords.com/2012/03/01/creating-your-own-ssl-certificate-authority/
http://developer.android.com/reference/org/apache/http/client/HttpClient.html
KeyStore, HttpClient, and HTTPS: Can someone explain this code to me?
http://blog.antoine.li/2010/10/22/android-trusting-ssl-certificates/
You can limit users to use JUST and only HTTPS in apache, IIS or whatever do you use. If your client connects to your server, his communications will be likely to encrypted, because he is already using HTTPS. And for responsing in HTTPS you virtually cannot send HTTPS responses, as far as I know, unless that other side isn't also a website (for example, if you have your website, you could send such a response e.g. to Google). You should be okay to send data like http status codes (OK, NotModified, PageNotFound, ...), or if you want something more, or if it is a requirement, then there you still have JSON and you could encode it as well, with some encoding algorithms, or use binary JSON format.
Check if your hosting company provides a free public shared https address. Most of them do.
If you want to understand how to do it right, follow this thread
Warning: Don't stick with the solution below for production.
If you plan o use an https endpoint without a certificate you have to make sure to disable peer verification, check this answer
The goal: a web service, secure, that will be called by exactly two clients, both outside the local network. The most obvious way to secure a web service is via https, obtaining a certificate from some CA. The problem is that this is a silly waste of money. The whole point of a CA is that it is a publicly trusted authority, so I don't have to verify my identity to every single person who wants to use my web page, the CA is doing that for them. However, when I'm dealing with a very small number of known clients, rather than the wide open public, I don't need anyone to vouch for me. We can do verification through our own channels.
Is there any way to accomplish this? Ideally, I'd be able to operate https with a certificate recognized by those calling my service, and if nobody else recognizes the certificate as valid, I don't care. I don't want them calling this service anyway. This should be a fairly common need in B2B data transfers (fixed-endpoint communications, rather than services intended for public consumption), and it is easy to do if you're transferring actual files (PGP-style encryption lets you simply verify and import one another's keys directly). But it isn't clear to me that this is possible with web sessions. It sure should be, if it is not. I have found some documentation of self-signed certificates, but they all seem to be intended for development purposes only, or internal use only, and expire quickly or require being on the same network.
Is there a good way to achieve this? Or am I going to have to encrypt the contents of the web service call instead? The latter is less desirable, because it would require the users of this service to add encryption code to their client applications (which assumes they are building these on a platform which easily can add support for common encryption routines, something that may or may not be true) rather than just relying on the standard, https framework.
I'm working on the Windows (IIS/ASP.NET) platform, if that makes any difference.
Creating your own CA and generating self-signed certificates is the way to go. There is no reason why they must be for development only, or expire quickly. You will be in control of this.
When I implemented this in a Java environment, the most useful resource I found was on Baban's Weblog. You can probably find a resource more relevant to your IIS environment.
To offer a secure service you don't need any certificate, only an https link. You are right that, in your case, a certificate does nothing for you. If your visitor insists on a certificate, then I second #sudocode's answer.
Our old authorization service used certificates, but in rebuilding it we got rid of the certificates and went to an Amazon ec2 style security for the services.
Now I want to prefix this with I am unsure whether this should be here or on server fault so I'll post it here to begin with.
We are developing a REST API in Coldfusion 9 which is being hosted on IIS 7 for a client which on certain calls must call another internal webservice. When making these calls from the server that the API is hosted on there are no errors, however when we make the call from a remote machine the following message is returned:
'connection failure. status code unavailable.'
I have googled the issue where the following was suggested as a fix http://www.talkingtree.com/blog/index.cfm/2004/7/28/20040729 but it does not work for me. The following are the notes from my own testing:
The calls which are causing the issue are a mix of get, put, post and delete.
The only common part of each call is the talking to the same webservice.
I am able to call the webservice directly from the places where I make the remote calls to the API from.
While all the calls make a call to the same webservice they do not all make the same call to the webservice.
Ideas:
Call the web service remotely using a URL that resolves to the internal ColdFusion server (e.g. http://[servername]:8300). You will probably have to some configuration to get this working. Reason for doing so is to identify if IIS or ColdFusion is the root cause. If you can hit the internal server remotely then IIS is probably the issue.
Is the web service call over SSL? If so, is remote caller also ColdFusion? If you've answered both yes, check to see if the SSL certificate is trusted by the remote caller's JVM. If not, you need to register it as part of the JVM's keystore.
Can you ping the host server from the caller? If not, does the caller need a "hosts" entry?
If enabled on your host, review the .NET filter and how it interacts with HTTP calls. I've experienced a situation where I was unable to access a folder called "/bin" because the .NET filter intercepted the requests.
The issue turned out to be that each of the calls required basic authentication which the calls themselves were handling, however basic authentication had been turned on in IIS which was causing IIS to intercept any requests with an Authorization header.
This causes an issue as IIS assumes that if authentication is passed up then it is for a user on that machine/domain and would reject any other credentials (which were valid for the system). It was working when we were logged into the machine because it was coming locally it did not need to authenticate the user.