Re: [Bacula-users] Question about bacula and tls
2015-09-28 17:43:26
Good night,
First of all thanks a lot for your time :)
Hello,
The TLS enable do not force the use of TLS. For example, if you configure your director with TLS enable = yes and TLS require = no, clients can communicate with your director with or without TLS. But if you configure your director with both TLS enable and TLS require = yes, then all your clients and storage daemons will only be able to communicate with your director with TLS.
Yes, this is clear
If you do not set TLS Verify Peer or TLS Allowed CN, then you can use any Certificate File or Directory. The certificate CN will not be checked against the Certificate File or Directory configured.
what do you mean? any ca or ca path for each side cert? I could use certificates from different ca in each side?. Even having the proper cn, this doesn’t worked in my testing env (which doesn’t use tis verify peer or tls allowed cn) … you mean the certificate won’t be checked if it was created by the ca_certificate file's ca? Sorry can’t understand this...
If TLS Verify Peer is enabled, then the peer´s hostname is verified against the subjectAltName (alternative name) and commonName attributes. This way, a certificate issued for myclient2.example.com cannot be used, for example, by a host named myclient1.example.com. Even if they are issued by your own CA (not a trusted root CA), you have the CN of the certificate file checked against the hostname (director, client or storage daemon host) that is using it.
Are you sure? this config parameter requires to specify ca cert file or ca path.. and the code seems to be doing a check of the remote side cert to be issued by the ca listed in ca cert or ca path…..
This just means the tls verify peer?. You can for instance use different ca for bacula-dir and bacula-fd mean while one cert with one ca has as cn the server name and the other one the bacula-fd’s daemon hostname?. Even when the ca is not trusted?? will it work?. Sorry but this doesn’t work to me…. are you really sure Ana?
If TLS Allowed CN is enabled, then in addition to the peer´s hostname being verified, just that ones listed in the "TLS Allowed CN" directives are permited.
So each part to have it’s proper cert (matching cn with the connecting name and so) and if this last is ok… to be in tls allowed cn too… do you mean this? If TLS Verify Peer is not enabled and a client uses a "false" certificate (myclient2 using the myclient1 certificate and myclient1 is in the allowed CN list, for example) from a host in the allowed CN list of allowed hosts, it will work.
I see… so the cert can be both from the same ca or not..or… isn’t it?
Openssl functions are used for certificate manipulation (including validation and verification).
Yep I’ve seen in the code…
So, it will depend of what you want to have in you TLS communication, even if using your own CA for the PKI infrastructure used in your bacula TLS environment. You can have your own CA (a virtual machine for this purpose), that will be your trusted CA for your environment. And let all your daemons trust in each other by setting properly the TLS Verify Peer and TLS Allowed CN directives. I think this should work fine for what you want.
I could use tls verify peer in the director and in bacula-fd (dir and sd are the same machine and to use loopback)…
I wanted each director and each fd, to only be able to be accesed by just those remote daemons who own a certificate allowing them to do so…
could you please paste an example config?
Thank you so much again, really, Egoitz |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
|
|