From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0ECD1FF15E
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue,  8 Apr 2025 10:48:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 88474EA7A;
	Tue,  8 Apr 2025 10:48:54 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:48:51 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <1603485978.1040.1744102131292@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <90bc6a8a-473c-4f3b-af49-603d2cdeacd2@proxmox.com>
References: <20250305214447.128975-1-admin@truthsolo.net>
 <mailman.798.1741211145.293.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
 <90bc6a8a-473c-4f3b-af49-603d2cdeacd2@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev75
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.046 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve-http-server v2 1/1] fix unexpected EOF
 for client when closing TLS session
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>


> Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> hat am 08.04.2025 09:27 CEST geschrieben:
> 
>  
> Am 05.03.25 um 22:45 schrieb Rob Rozestraten via pve-devel:
> > When pve-http-server initiates the closure of a TLS session, it does not
> > send a TLS close notify, resulting in an unexpected EOF error on systems
> > with recent crypto policies. This can break functionality with other
> > applications, such as Foreman[0].
> > 
> > This behavior can be observed in the following cases:
> > 
> >  * client uses HTTP/1.0 (no keepalive; server closes connection)
> >  * client sends no data for 5 sec (timeout; server closes connection)
> >  * server responds with 400 (no keepalive; server closes connection)
> > 
> > This patch sends the TLS close notify prior to socket teardown,
> > resulting in clean closure of TLS connections and no client error.
> > 
> > It also moves shutdown() to after the clearing of handlers. The reason
> > for this is stoptls() must come before shutdown(), but it also triggers
> > on_drain(), which calls client_do_disconnect() again. The extra call to
> > client_do_disconnect() is avoided inside accept_connections() by commit
> > f737984, but perhaps clearing the handlers prior to shutdown() will
> > avoid it in all cases.
> > 
> > [0]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman_fog_proxmox/issues/325
> > 
> 
> I feel like the questions regarding blocking/missing client ack from
> Fabian from v1 are not answered yet:
> 
> > If I read the docs right, this could block (would that be an issue here?) and could potentially destroy the handle (so that might need to be rechecked afterwards to prevent spurious warnings?)
> > 
> > what happens if we initiate the teardown, and the client never acks it?

there was some more input in a separate mail:

https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/mailman.799.1741211155.293.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com/


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel