Re: [TECH] academique, routage BGP asymetrique casse TLS 443
jehan procaccia INT via frnog <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.operators.frnog |
|---|---|
| Organization | IMT |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ok, dernier jet avant le weekend avec cette capture des 2 cotés pour avoir un os a ronger ;-) coté "client" VPS OVH qui initie la connexion # openssl s_client -connect srv.int-evry.fr:443 Connecting to 157.150.11.6 CONNECTED(00000003) write:errno=104 ce meme client voit ceci en filtrant sur l'IP du serveur sollicité /# tcpdump -i eth0 host 157.150.11.6 and 'tcp[tcpflags] & tcp-syn != 0' -nnvv dropped privs to tcpdump tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), snapshot length 262144 bytes 16:52:54.044825 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 53493, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 51.178.25.200.46744 > 157.150.11.6.443: Flags [S], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0xf8d3), seq 1392587108, win 65320, options [mss 1420,sackOK,TS val 3947115214 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 16:52:54.050731 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x7651 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467895586 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 16:52:55.452651 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x70d7 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467896988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 16:52:57.452632 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x6907 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467898988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 16:53:01.452679 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x5967 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467902988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 16:53:09.452810 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x3a27 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467910988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 16:53:25.452647 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xfba6 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467926988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 ^C 7 packets captured 9 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel/ J'ai pourtant l'impression qu'il reçoit bien les reponses dès le 2eme packet /16:52:54.050731 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 50, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0x7651 (correct), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467895586 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0/ Qui correspond a la reponse coté serveur /17:52:54.047975 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x7651), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467895586 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0/ => meme /seq 1591607196,/ qui ack /1392587109 => /demande initiale en seq/1392587108 ,/ bref tout semble bon jusque là , non ? Coté Serveur tj la meme chose au total /# tcpdump -i eth0 host 51.178.25.200 and 'tcp[tcpflags] & tcp-syn != 0' -nnvv dropped privs to tcpdump tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 262144 bytes 17:52:54.047928 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 53493, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 51.178.25.200.46744 > 157.150.11.6.443: Flags [S], cksum 0xf8d3 (correct), seq 1392587108, win 65320, options [mss 1420,sackOK,TS val 3947115214 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 17:52:54.047975 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x7651), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467895586 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 17:52:55.449927 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x70d7), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467896988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 17:52:57.449883 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x6907), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467898988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 17:53:01.449928 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x5967), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467902988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 17:53:09.449913 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0x3a27), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467910988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 17:53:25.449930 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60) 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.46744: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d (incorrect -> 0xfba6), seq 1591607196, ack 1392587109, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3467926988 ecr 3947115214,nop,wscale 8], length 0 ^C 7 packets captured 7 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel/ Bref je reste perplexe ... Merci On 3/6/26 17:18, David Ponzone wrote: > Faut prendre une trace tcpdump sur le client aussi, pour comparer > paquet par paquet, ça te dira s’il y a des paquets retour qui ont été > filtrés. > Après, on peut faire une comparaison des 2 traces avec Wireshark à > priori (sujet abordé dans un autre fil récemment). > > David > >> Le 6 mars 2026 à 16:15, jehan procaccia INT >> <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >> MErci , mais bof .. cela ne change pas apparement >> >> sur le client VPS OVH je fait >> >> # ip link set dev eth0 mtu 1460 >> >> c'est bien en place >> >> 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu *1460* qdisc fq_codel >> state UP group default qlen 1000 >> >> je lance mon test >> >> # openssl s_client -connect srv.int-evry.fr:443 >> >> meme echec >> >> coté server destination je vois bien arriver la requetes comme avant >> avec un Syn from /51.178.25.200 (VPS OVH) /et des reponses Syn-Ack >> depuis mon serveur lcoal (/157.150.11.6) /qui ne semblent pas revenir >> sur le VPS OVH :-( >> >> # tcpdump -i eth0 host 51.178.25.200 and 'tcp[tcpflags] & tcp-syn != >> 0' -nnvv >> >> /17:08:01.589820 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 2470, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 51.178.25.200.40236 > 157.150.11.6.443: Flags [S], cksum 0xd098 >> (correct), seq 412271373, win 65320, options [mss 1420,sackOK,TS val >> 3944422756 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 >> 17:08:01.589873 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0xba7f), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465203128 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> 17:08:02.591909 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0xb695), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465204130 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> 17:08:04.591924 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0xaec5), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465206130 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> 17:08:08.591929 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0x9f25), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465210130 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> 17:08:16.793894 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0x7f1b), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465218332 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> 17:08:32.794923 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], >> proto TCP (6), length 60) >> 157.150.11.6.443 > 51.178.25.200.40236: Flags [S.], cksum 0xf58d >> (incorrect -> 0x409a), seq 466676691, ack 412271374, win 28960, >> options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3465234333 ecr 3944422756,nop,wscale >> 8], length 0 >> ^C >> 7 packets captured >> 7 packets received by filter >> 0 packets dropped by kernel/ >> >> >> >> On 3/6/26 16:38, David Ponzone wrote: >>> Ou en forçant le TCP MSS à 1420 par exemple. >>> >>> David Ponzone >>> >>> >>> >>>> Le 6 mars 2026 à 15:34, P. Deloney via frnog<[email protected]> a écrit : >>>> >>>> jehan procaccia INT via frnog<[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> oui j'ai des traces [1] >>>> Ça ressemble clairement à un problème de MTU ou une mauvaise >>>> configuration d'un pare-feu "stateful". >>>> >>>> Je ferais des tests en baissant le MTU de l'interface de l'hôte qui >>>> initie la connexion TCP. >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------- >>>> Liste de diffusion du FRnOG >>>> http://www.frnog.org/ > --------------------------- Liste de diffusion du FRnOG http://www.frnog.org/