Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork3k
Add TLS Client Authentication#1151
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
base:dev-next
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
Update gVisor to 20231113.0
Introduce a feature to require and verify client certificate toprovide mutual authentication in TLS.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as abuse.
This comment was marked as abuse.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
mTLS is an established protocol and the SSL error you mention is expected. The peers communicating using mTLS need to use certificates which are signed by a self-issued root certificate, meaning such networks are not available for public access and usual one way TLS connections are not allowed. So it is meaningless to implement a fallback since it completely invalidates the mTLS processes. |
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as abuse.
This comment was marked as abuse.
fix typo in tls.zh.mdSigned-off-by: jose-C2OaWi <111356383+jose-C2OaWi@users.noreply.github.com>
Mahdi-zarei commentedNov 27, 2023 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
This is absurd, regarding the diagram you have sent, the server asks for certificate from client (which tells the client that the protocol being used is mTLS and not TLS) whereas in normal TLS no such operation is performed. By simply accepting the GFW's invalid certificate and serving a webpage you are practically violating the protocol you are advertising to conform to and this is a much severer footprint than correctly rejecting the GFW's invalid certificate. |
Signed-off-by: jose-C2OaWi <111356383+jose-C2OaWi@users.noreply.github.com>
b759111
to733c14d
Compare3611dcd
to36c095f
Compare4492a53
to989034b
Compare8ec5593
tob3c1110
Compare
Add a feature forIssue 1054
Credits:
@ginuerzh for the implementation ofgost