Skip to content
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

reevaluate "insecure reattach" error #2013

Closed
slingamn opened this issue Dec 6, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2073
Closed

reevaluate "insecure reattach" error #2013

slingamn opened this issue Dec 6, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2073
Milestone

Comments

@slingamn
Copy link
Member

slingamn commented Dec 6, 2022

See #955 for some context. Bouncer reattach that mixes secure and insecure connections has been disallowed ever since the functionality was first built (in c2faeed). The following year (998ac69) we removed the plaintext listener by default.

Ever since, it seems like most errors due to mixing secure and insecure connections are spurious: the connection is actually secure, but is being transported over an incorrectly configured reverse proxy (e.g. WEBIRC is being sent without the secure flag, or a websocket is being proxied without adding X-Forwarded-Proto: https). It may be time to delete this check; we are already pushing operators hard to disable plaintext, and it's not clear what purpose it serves if plaintext is enabled nonetheless (the SASL PLAIN handshake is still being transmitted and acknowledged in plaintext, we just don't allow the reattach).

@slingamn slingamn modified the milestones: v2.11, selected Dec 6, 2022
@slingamn slingamn modified the milestones: selected, v2.12.0 Dec 28, 2022
@slingamn
Copy link
Member Author

slingamn commented Jun 4, 2023

Question: should we be trying to prevent clients from mixing Tor and non-Tor? (I thought we were already doing this, but we are not, so it would be a compatibility break.)

@Mikaela
Copy link
Contributor

Mikaela commented Jun 5, 2023

Question: should we be trying to prevent clients from mixing Tor and non-Tor? (I thought we were already doing this, but we are not, so it would be a compatibility break.)

No. That will mess up people like me who are just using Tor to provide cover traffic for those actually depending on Tor (or just attempting to normalise its use) and harm especially iOS users.

Additionally it will hurt at least one network I oper on as I don't need anonymity or privacy from myself while using Tor to connect there lets me know if we have an issue with the Tor node or otherwise helps with troubleshooting if someone asks about it or claims it to not be working.

slingamn added a commit to slingamn/ergo that referenced this issue Jun 5, 2023
See ergochat#2013; given that plaintext is deprecated now, it seems like there is no
added value from continuing to police this.
@slingamn slingamn mentioned this issue Jun 5, 2023
slingamn added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants