git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] New VPN implementation based on IKEv2 backed by Vault


Thanks for sharing the details. Now I have a better perspective of the
proposal.It is an interesting integration of CloudStack VPN service with
Vault PKI feature.

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Khosrow Moossavi <kmoossavi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> One of the things Vault does is essentially one of the thing Let's Encrypt
> does,
> acting as CA and generating/signing certificates.
>
> From the Vault website itself:
>
> "HashiCorp Vault secures, stores, and tightly controls access to tokens,
> passwords,
> certificates, API keys, and other secrets in modern computing. Vault
> handles leasing,
> key revocation, key rolling, and auditing. Through a unified API, users can
> access an
> encrypted Key/Value store and network encryption-as-a-service, or generate
> AWS
> IAM/STS credentials, SQL/NoSQL databases, X.509 certificates, SSH
> credentials,
> and more."
>
> In our case we are going to use Vault as PKI backend engine, to act as Root
> CA,
> sign certificates, handle CRL (Certificate Revocation List), etc.
> Technically we can
> do these with Let's Encrypt, but I haven't started exploring the
> possibilities or potential
> limitation. Using external services (such as Let's Encrypt) or going
> forward with
> Bring You Own Certificate model would be for future, it they ever made
> sense to do.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> rafaelweingartner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Got it. Thanks for the explanations.
> > There is one other thing I do not understand. This Vault thing that you
> > mention, how does it work? Is it similar to let's encrypt?
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Khosrow Moossavi <
> kmoossavi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> > > rafaelweingartner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > So, you need a certificate that is signed by the CA that is used by
> the
> > > VPN
> > > > service. Is that it?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Correct, a self signed "server certificate" against CA, to be installed
> > > directly on VR.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > It has been a while that I do not configure these VPN systems; do you
> > > need
> > > > access to the private key of the CA? Or, does the program simply
> > validate
> > > > the user (VPN client) certificate to see if it is issued by a
> specific
> > > CA?
> > > > I believe it also needs the public key of the user to execute the
> > > handshake
> > > > and create the connection.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > No, end user only needs to have Root CA at hand, to *trust* it. Both
> the
> > > "Server
> > > Certificate" and "Server Private Key" are sensitive information and
> only
> > > exist  on
> > > VR.
> > >
> > > User then can go ahead and install the Root CA on their local machine
> and
> > > open
> > > up VPN connection with strongSwan client of the correspondning OS
> they're
> > > on
> > > import the Root CA, and their credential (EAP on VPN side), and that's
> > it.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Khosrow Moossavi <
> > > kmoossavi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Rafael,
> > > > >
> > > > > We cannot use SshKeyPair functionality because the proposed VPN
> > > > > implementation
> > > > > does need a signed certificate and not a ssh key pair. The process
> is
> > > as
> > > > > follow:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) generate root CA (if doesn't exist)
> > > > > 2) generate bunch of intermediate steps (config urls, CRLs, role
> > name,
> > > > ...)
> > > > > [I'm not going
> > > > > in detail now, here, for simplicity]
> > > > > 3) self sign a certificate against the root CA (regenerate every
> time
> > > > start
> > > > > VPN command
> > > > > executed)
> > > > >
> > > > > This will produce:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Root CA cert (one per domain in cloudstack)
> > > > > 2) Server cert (one per VR)
> > > > > 3) Server private key (one per VR)
> > > > >
> > > > > Then all the above will be pushed to the said VR we want to start
> VPN
> > > on,
> > > > > and start
> > > > > ipsec service on it (with extra configuration - which will be
> > available
> > > > in
> > > > > codebase) and
> > > > > finally present Root CA for user to download and install on their
> > local
> > > > > machine to be
> > > > > able to "trust" VR they are VPNing to.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 6:19 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> > > > > rafaelweingartner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Khosrow thanks for the interesting feature. You mention two
> > possible
> > > > > > methods to manage certificates; one using the CA framework, and
> > other
> > > > > using
> > > > > > third party such as Vault and Let’s Encrypt.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have you considered using the sshKeyPair API methods (is it part
> of
> > > the
> > > > > CA
> > > > > > framework?)? I mean, users already can generate key pairs via
> ACS,
> > > and
> > > > > then
> > > > > > they are presented with the private key. You could simply list
> > these
> > > > > > certificates for the user when they want to configure a new
> > > certificate
> > > > > for
> > > > > > a VPN or generate one in runtime using this feature. Reading your
> > > > feature
> > > > > > proposal I did not understand how you are binding certificated
> > with a
> > > > VPN
> > > > > > (are you always generating new ones and simply returning the
> > private
> > > > key
> > > > > to
> > > > > > users?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Moreover, as the sshKeyPair methods, I do believe you should only
> > > > return
> > > > > > the private key once. Therefore, you should not store it in ACS.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Khosrow Moossavi <
> > > > kmoossavi@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Community
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to open up a discussion around the new Remote Access VPN
> > > > > > > implementation on VRs. Currently
> > > > > > > we have only L2TP implementation, which lacks different
> features
> > > > (such
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > verbos logging), so we
> > > > > > > decided to start developing new implementation based on IKEv2
> (on
> > > top
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the existing strongSwan).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We have this feature working locally for over a week now, and
> > seems
> > > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > ready for opening up a
> > > > > > > PR on official repo. But before doing so we agreed to open up a
> > > > > > discussion
> > > > > > > here first.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The current implementation we use EAP + Public Key for
> > > > authentication,
> > > > > so
> > > > > > > we need to have a PKI
> > > > > > > Engine somewhere. Rather than start re-inventing the wheel (and
> > > start
> > > > > > > extending the current CA Framework
> > > > > > > which was done by Rohit) we decided to delegate this
> > functionality
> > > to
> > > > > > > HashiCorp Vault, which will act as
> > > > > > > a PKI backend engine for Cloudstack.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The way I implemented this specific part of the code, is that
> it
> > > can
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > be extended/implemented with other
> > > > > > > concrete classes or designs (such as going forward with
> in-house
> > > PKI
> > > > > > > engine, or even use external services
> > > > > > > such as Let's Encrypt), but at the end of the day we strongly
> > > suggest
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > use Vault, as it is really easy to use.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please find the design document here[1], and share your
> > feedback. I
> > > > > will
> > > > > > > open up a PR -as is- soon to be able
> > > > > > > to have a source code to discuss around it as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/
> > > > > > > VPN+Implementation+based+on+IKEv2+backed+by+Vault+as+PKI+
> Engine
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Khosrow Moossavi
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cloud Infrastructure Developer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > t 514.447.3456
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Rafael Weingärtner
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rafael Weingärtner
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >
>



-- 
Rafael Weingärtner