An Introduction to OpenSSL Programming, Part I of II
Our web server is mainly a mirror of the client but with a few twists. First, we fork() in order to let the server handle multiple clients. Second, we use OpenSSL's BIO APIs to read the client's request one line at a time, as well as to do buffered writes to the client. Finally, the server closure sequence is more complicated.
On Linux, the simplest way to write a server that can handle multiple clients is to create a new server process for each client that connects. We do that by calling fork() after accept() returns. Each new process executes independently and just exits when it's finished serving the client. Although this approach can be quite slow on busy web servers it's perfectly acceptable here. The main server accept loop is shown in Listing 5.
After forking and creating the SSL object, the server calls SSL_accept(), which causes OpenSSL to perform the server side of the SSL handshake. As with SSL_connect(), because we're using blocking sockets, SSL_accept() will block until the entire handshake has completed. Thus, the only situation in which SSL_accept() will return is when the handshake has completed or an error has been detected. SSL_accept() returns 1 for success and 0 or negative for error.
OpenSSL's BIO objects are stackable to some extent. Thus, we can wrap an SSL object in a BIO (the ssl_bio object) and then wrap that BIO in a buffered BIO object, as shown below:
io=BIO_new(BIO_f_buffer()); ssl_bio=BIO_new(BIO_f_ssl()); BIO_set_ssl(ssl_bio,ssl,BIO_CLOSE); BIO_push(io,ssl_bio);
This allows us to perform buffered reads and writes on the SSL connection by using the BIO_* functions on the new io object. At this point you might ask, why is this good? Primarily, it's a matter of programming convenience. It lets the programmer work in natural units (lines and characters) rather than SSL records.
An HTTP request consists of a request line followed by a bunch of header lines and an optional body. The end of the header lines is indicated by a blank line (i.e., a pair of CRLFs, though sometimes broken clients will send a pair of LFs instead). The most convenient way to read the request line and headers is to read one line at a time until you see a blank line. We can do this using the OpenSSL_BIO_gets() call, as shown in Listing 6.
The BIO_gets() call behaves analogously to the stdio fgets() call. It takes an arbitrary-sized buffer and a length and reads a line from the SSL connection into that buffer. The result is always null terminated (but includes the terminating LF). Thus, we simply read one line at a time until we get a line that consists of simply an LF or a CRLF.
Because we use a fixed-length buffer, it is possible, though unlikely, that we will get a line that's too long. In that event, the long line will be split over two lines. In the extremely unlikely event that the split happens right before the CRLF, the next line we read will consist of only the CRLF from the previous line. In this case we'll be fooled into thinking that the headers have finished prematurely. A real web server would check for this case, but it's not worth doing here. Note that no matter what the incoming line length is, there's no chance of a buffer overrun. All that can happen is that we'll misparse the headers.
Note that we really don't do anything with the HTTP request. We just read it and discard it. A real implementation would read the request line and the headers, figure out if there was a body and read that too.
The next step is to write the HTTP response and close the connection:
if((r=BIO_puts (io,"HTTP/1.0 200 OK\\r\\n"))<0) err_exit("Write error"); if((r=BIO_puts (io,"Server: EKRServer\\r\\n\\r\\n"))<0) err_exit("Write error"); if((r=BIO_puts (io,"Server test page\\r\\n"))<0) err_exit("Write error"); if((r=BIO_flush(io))<0) err_exit("Error flushing BIO");
Note that we're using BIO_puts() instead of SSL_write(). This allows us to write the response one line at a time but have the entire response written as a single SSL record. This is important because the cost of preparing an SSL record for transmission (computing the integrity check and encrypting it) is quite significant. Thus, it's a good idea to make the records as large as possible.
It's worth noting a couple of subtleties about using this kind of buffered write. First, you need to flush the buffer before you close. The SSL object has no knowledge that you've layered a BIO on top of it, so if you destroy the SSL connection you'll just leave the last chunk of data sitting in the buffer. The BIO_flush() call takes care of this. Also, by default, OpenSSL uses a 1024-byte buffer size for buffered BIOs. Because SSL records can be up to 16KB long, using a 1024-byte buffer can cause excessive fragmentation (and hence lower performance). You can use the BIO_ctrl() API to increase the buffer size.
Once we've finished transmitting the response, we need to send our close_notify. As before, this is done using SSL_shutdown(). Unfortunately, things get a bit trickier when the server closes first. Our first call to SSL_shutdown() sends the close_notify but doesn't look for it on the other side. Thus, it returns immediately but with a value of 0, indicating that the closure sequence isn't finished. It's then the application's responsibility to call SSL_shutdown() again.
It's possible to have two attitudes here. We could decide we've seen all of the HTTP request that we care about. We're not interested in anything else. Hence, we don't care whether the client sends a close_notify or not. Alternatively, we strictly obey the protocol and expect others to as well. Thus, we require a close_notify.
If we have the first attitude then life is simple. We call SSL_shutdown() to send our close_notify and then exit right away, regardless of whether the client has sent one or not. If we take the second attitude (which our sample server does), then life is more complicated because clients often don't behave correctly.
The first problem we face is that clients often don't send close_notifys all. In fact, some clients close the connection as soon as they've read the entire HTTP response (some versions of IE do this). When we send our close_notify, the other side may send a TCP RST segment, in which case the program will catch a SIGPIPE. We install a dummy SIGPIPE handler in initialize_ctx() to protect against this problem.
The second problem we face is that the client may not send a close_notify immediately in response to our close_notify. Some versions of Netscape require you to send a TCP FIN first. Thus, we call shutdown(s,1) before we call SSL_shutdown() the second time. When called with a “how” argument of 1, shutdown() sends a FIN but leaves the socket open for reading. The code to do the server shutdown is shown in Listing 7.
|Happy Birthday Linux||Aug 25, 2016|
|ContainerCon Vendors Offer Flexible Solutions for Managing All Your New Micro-VMs||Aug 24, 2016|
|Updates from LinuxCon and ContainerCon, Toronto, August 2016||Aug 23, 2016|
|NVMe over Fabrics Support Coming to the Linux 4.8 Kernel||Aug 22, 2016|
|What I Wish I’d Known When I Was an Embedded Linux Newbie||Aug 18, 2016|
|Pandas||Aug 17, 2016|
- Happy Birthday Linux
- ContainerCon Vendors Offer Flexible Solutions for Managing All Your New Micro-VMs
- Updates from LinuxCon and ContainerCon, Toronto, August 2016
- What I Wish I’d Known When I Was an Embedded Linux Newbie
- New Version of GParted
- Download "Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI"
- NVMe over Fabrics Support Coming to the Linux 4.8 Kernel
- Tor 0.2.8.6 Is Released
- All about printf
- Blender for Visual Effects
With all the industry talk about the benefits of Linux on Power and all the performance advantages offered by its open architecture, you may be considering a move in that direction. If you are thinking about analytics, big data and cloud computing, you would be right to evaluate Power. The idea of using commodity x86 hardware and replacing it every three years is an outdated cost model. It doesn’t consider the total cost of ownership, and it doesn’t consider the advantage of real processing power, high-availability and multithreading like a demon.
This ebook takes a look at some of the practical applications of the Linux on Power platform and ways you might bring all the performance power of this open architecture to bear for your organization. There are no smoke and mirrors here—just hard, cold, empirical evidence provided by independent sources. I also consider some innovative ways Linux on Power will be used in the future.Get the Guide