Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- From: "Alexander Nickolov" <agnickolov@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:09:45 -0800
That's because a firewall can enforce HTTP format for the traffic
through port 80. Use port 443 (HTTPS) instead.
--
=====================================
Alexander Nickolov
Microsoft MVP [VC], MCSD
email: agnickolov@xxxxxxxx
MVP VC FAQ: http://www.mvps.org/vcfaq
=====================================
"Mick" <Mick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0E1EEA8B-942C-40C2-9624-A10F04F1BA1A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Our data is binary, and our applications are not web browsers or web
> servers.
> We're using Winsock2 sockets with overlapped I/O through completion ports.
>
> The problem we have isn't security because we encrypt the data ourselves
> before it's put on the wire. What we need is a way to get through the
> firewall and be able to connect to our components (NT services). Most of
> our
> customers allow traffic through port 80, so when we want to create a
> socket
> connection from one machine to another machine this is behind the firewall
> we
> can specify the IP address of the machine and port 80. This works fine at
> most of our client's sites, but not all of them.
>
>
> "Alexander Nickolov" wrote:
>
>> Well, of course this helps nothing with security :). I just noticed
>> the intent of the original post. I've been handling this in the
>> completely wrong direction...
>>
>> To OP: HTTP won't help you a bit since it's not a secure protocol.
>> You need to use SSL/TLS to encrypt your data. If you are worried
>> about firewalls blocking ports, use the HTTPS port 443.
>>
>> --
>> =====================================
>> Alexander Nickolov
>> Microsoft MVP [VC], MCSD
>> email: agnickolov@xxxxxxxx
>> MVP VC FAQ: http://www.mvps.org/vcfaq
>> =====================================
>>
>> "Steve Alpert" <sra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:OHT7gEc%23FHA.2176@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Mick wrote:
>> >> We have a set of applications that use TCP sockets (winsock2) to
>> >> communicate between machines. To communicate, a client machine
>> >> establishes a TCP socket connection to a server, then sends and
>> >> receives
>> >> messages using our own proprietary protocol. We have developed and
>> >> tested
>> >> all of this and it works fine. Now, because of firewall security
>> >> issues
>> >> at some of our customer sites, we would like to wrap these
>> >> communications
>> >> in the HTTP protocol. Is it possible to do this? If so, what would be
>> >> required to implement this?
>> >>
>> >> I know very little about HTTP, but my understanding is that HTTP
>> >> communications requires that you establish a session with a server,
>> >> send
>> >> request messages to the server, and then wait to receive a response.
>> >> Would this require us to scrap our existing socket implementation, or
>> >> can
>> >> we just wrap our messages in HTTP?
>> >>
>> >> Any advice on how to implenent this will be much appreciated. Thanks!
>> >>
>> >
>> > Although likely, most firewalls block ports and not protocols. That
>> > suggests they leave open port 80 (assuming http) and 443 (assuming
>> > https).
>> > They MAY check the envelopes but then again, maybe not!
>> >
>> > /steveA
>> >
>> > --
>> > Steve Alpert
>> > my email Fgrir_Nycreg @ vqk.pbz is encrypted with ROT13 (www.rot13.org)
>> > and spaces
>> >
>>
>>
>>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- From: Mick
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- References:
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- From: Steve Alpert
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- From: Alexander Nickolov
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- From: Mick
- Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- Prev by Date: Re: Win32 Multicast Problem
- Next by Date: Re: CArchive timeout method ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- Next by thread: Re: Wrapping TCP communications in HTTP
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|