Skip to main content

ssl - HAProxy redirect traffic to NGINX getting error "The plain HTTP request was sent to HTTPS port"

itemprop="text">

What we are trying to is to have
HAProxy to listen for all incoming traffic from port 443 (HTTPS &
WSS)



Below is our HAProxy
config:



frontend
wwws

bind 0.0.0.0:443 ssl crt /etc/haproxy/server.pem

timeout client 1h
default_backend www_backend

backend
www_backend
mode http
stats enable
stats uri
/haproxy
option forwardfor
reqadd x-forwarded-proto:\
https


server server1 backend:3000 weight 1 maxconn 8192
check


0.0.0.0:443
(e.g. https://example.com) is our HA proxy server listening for all
incoming 443 traffic
backend:3000 is our nginx server which is set to listen
for SSL connections



The current problem we are
facing right now is when we enter https://example.com, the browser is showing the following
error:



400 Bad
Request

The plain HTTP request was sent to HTTPS
port
nginx/1.7.5


It
does seems like when haproxy forward the traffic to nginx (backend:3000) it converts to
http.



I thought "reqadd x-forwarded-proto:\
https " is suppose to make sure it is https.



Not
sure what is wrong with our haproxy config.


class="post-text" itemprop="text">
class="normal">Answer





Change the backend server specification to
this:



server server1 backend:3000
weight 1 maxconn 8192 check ssl verify
none


The "ssl" part
defines that the backend speaks SSL, if it is not present, haproxy will default to plain
HTTP. The "verify none" disables certificate check, something you probably don't want to
do with your internal servers anyway.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able