openssl on Digi Hunch

Connect kubectl to private Kubernetes cluster in EKS and AKS

Sat, 10 Jun 2023 19:31:00 -0400

Managed Kubernetes services give user a cluster endpoint and a number of worker nodes, with the choice. For each access, users have the choice of making them publicly available, or keeping them on private networking. In my opinion, any deployment beyond personal hobbies, should use Kubernetes private cluster, with both cluster endpoint and worker nodes on private subnet. There is no reason to expose computing nodes or Kubernetes management traffic publicly.

For worker nodes, it is fairly easy to put VMs on private network, but many companies still have the cluster endpoint exposed publicly. There are usually two reasons. First, their CI/CD agent is hosted somewhere else on the Internet (instead of on private network with private connectivity to Kubernetes cluster) and need to access Kubernetes cluster endpoint. Second, when the cluster needs to connect with third-party identity provider as OIDC provider, a two-way communication is needed.

There is a classic pattern of using a public bastion host (jump box), with a bastion host on the public subnet, routable to the private endpoint of managed Kubernetes service. Clients then connect to the bastion host via port 22 on a public IP address. The authentication is based on SSH key pair, or worse, password. The port forwarding (aka SSH tunnelling) capability enables all the magics.

Exposing a jump box in the public subnet with RSA key authentication is still not favourable. In this post, I’ll examine some secure patterns to connect to private endpoint with improved security posture.

AWS options

There are two problems. First, how to establish connectivity to the Bastion host in a private subnet. Second, how to use the Bastion host to proxy traffic to the cluster endpoint also in private subnet. To the first problem, there are two potential solutions: SSM Session Manager, and EC2 Instance Connect (EIC) with EIC endpoint (EICE).

SSM Session Manager was introduce in 2018. It runs an agent on the EC2, which initiates a connection to the SSM endpoint on the AWS side. This connection enables not only Session Manager, but also other Systems Managers (SSM) services such as Fleet Manager, Patch Manager and State Manager. The problem that session manager originally addresses is server management.

AWS launched EC2 Instance Connect (EIC) in 2019, and EIC Endpoint (EICE) in 2023. EIC addresses the problem with managing SSH key pairs at scale. It dynamically generates an SSH key pair for server access, based on IAM permission. However, it still requires an instance to have its SSH port publicly accessible. With EICE, it is no longer a requirement. In the diagram, EICE is placed in a private subnet, allowing EICE service to reach private instances at their SSH port.

Here is a comparison of the two:

	EC2 Instance Connect (EIC) with EIC Endpoint	SSM Session Manager
Location of Bastion host	Private Subnet.	Private Subnet
Need Ingress Port	Yes. Port 22 must open to the endpoint.	No. SSM agent initiate outbound connection from the instance
Traffic Path	AWS CLI → AWS EIC ES → EICE→EC2 Inst	AWS CLI → AWS SSM ES → SSM ← EC2 Inst
Authentication	AWS IAM and ephemeral SSH key when using AWS CLI directly AWS IAM and long-term SSH key when using SSH proxy command	AWS IAM and long-term SSH key when using AWS CLI directly or SSH proxy command
Work with OpenSSH	Yes	Yes
Cost	There is no additional cost for using EIC.	No additional cost, unless private SSM Endpoint.

Let’s take a look at each option.

EC2 Instance Connect

To use EIC, pick an AMI that has it pre-installed and ensure instance profile has correct policy, as the document states here. AWC CLI will make use of local OpenSSL client. So make sure there connection at port 22 is open. To make it work with EC2 instance on a private subnet, create an EC2 Instance Connect Endpoint on the VPC, and ensure that the security group of EC2 allows port 22 from the Endpoint. Run this command:

$ aws ec2-instance-connect ssh --instance-id i-00ea30a6e02db33fe

The command above simply generates a key pair internally, add the public key to the server side, and connect with SSH from the client side. The command takes you to an SSH session. Checking ps -ef | grep ssh on the client machine, you can see the full parameter of SSH, including the location of the ephemeral private key.

However, if you use AWS CLI open-tunnel as proxy command to ssh, then you’d still have to use the key pair used to create the EC2 instance. As suggested at the bottom of this blog post, the command is:

$ ssh ec2-user@[INSTANCE] -i [SSH-KEY] -o ProxyCommand='aws ec2-instance-connect open-tunnel --instance-id %h'

This is a bummer, because with native SSH tool you do not get the primary benefit of EIC – ephemeral key pair.

SSM Session Manager

Now let’s look at SSM session manager. Similarly, it needs an agent installed and IAM role configured. You can connect to from web console but more importantly, from AWS CLI:

$ aws ssm start-session --target i-0531b19bec8ad022d

This command takes you to an SSH session with user ssm-user, without starting an OpenSSH client process locally. User do not have to manage key pair. There is also a document about using this command as proxy command, which uses an SSM document. I have one of the SSH config entry as:

host i-* mi-*
 ProxyCommand sh -c "aws ssm start-session --target %h --document-name AWS-StartSSHSession --parameters 'portNumber=%p'"
 User ec2-user
 IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_rsa

This allows me to directly SSH to client using OpenSSL client (e.g. ssh i-0531b19bec8ad022d) by Instance ID. With this, I also need to specify my own OS user and matching private key.

I know I will use the OpenSSH client a lot from pipelines because it is very powerful. In both options, I have to live with managing key pairs myself. With SSM session manager’s proxy command, the instance does not need port 22 to open, which is a great advantage, in terms of security and operation. SSM Session Manager is a winner.

SOCKS5 proxy for kubectl

Either SSM Session Manager or EIC with EICE enables an SSH tunnel with key encryption between client (a local computer or a pipeline agent). On top of the SSH tunnel, we can build a SOCKS5 proxy. Kubernetes document has a good page on how to do this. I managed to get this to work with a few gotchas.

To put this in practice, I first created a VPC stack with a bastion host using terraform template from my vpc-base project. The terraform output will give the next set of commands to run to create a private cluster, using a manifest rendered from the file private-cluster.yaml.tmpl:

# cd aws_vpc
# terraform init
# terraform plan
# terraform apply
# ... run the given command ...
# envsubst < private-cluster.yaml.tmpl | tee | eksctl create cluster -f -

# Run this from a remote host without access to cluster endpoint.
# Run terraform apply and terraform output contains the variables needed for the next steps

# the command below may take 15 minutes to create a private cluster

eksctl create cluster -f private-cluster.yaml 

aws eks update-kubeconfig --name private-cluster

At this point, the kubeconfig file has been updated, but kubectl (from Internet or on-prem) is unable to connect to cluster endpoint (on private network). In order to

BASTION_SECURITY_GROUP_ID=$(terraform output -raw bastion_sg_id)
CLUSTER_SECURITY_GROUP_ID=$(aws eks describe-cluster --name private-cluster --query "cluster.resourcesVpcConfig.clusterSecurityGroupId" --output text)

# In Cluster Endpoint's security group, open up port 443 to Bastion host
aws ec2 authorize-security-group-ingress --group-id $CLUSTER_SECURITY_GROUP_ID --source-group $BASTION_SECURITY_GROUP_ID --protocol tcp --port 443

# Test with connecting to Bastion host with ssh i-0750643179667a5b6, assuming .ssh/config file is configured as above. From the bastion host, you can test:
# curl -k https://EC5405EE1846F19F9F61ED28FB12A6A9.sk1.us-west-2.eks.amazonaws.com/api 
# if you get an HTTP response, even an error code 403, the bastion host has TCP connectivity to cluster endpoint

# then we can start an SSH session as a SOCKS5 proxy on the remote host
ssh -D 1080 -q -N i-0750643179667a5b6

# add > /dev/null 2>&1 & to push it to background, or use ctrl+z after running the command
# to validate that the SOCKS5 proxy is working, you can run the same curl command with a proxy parameter:
# curl -k https://EC5405EE1846F19F9F61ED28FB12A6A9.sk1.us-west-2.eks.amazonaws.com/api --proxy socks5://localhost:1080

# you can instruct kubectl to use the SOCKS5 proxy with the following environment variable
export HTTPS_PROXY=socks5://localhost:1080

kubectl get node

# alternatively, add "proxy-url: socks5://localhost:1080" below server attribute in ~/.kube/config file.

There are some pitfalls to watch for. On the remote host both ssh command and kubectl command implicitly uses AWS CLI. Therefore, make sure the profile and IAM role are correctly configured. For example, if SSM agent requires one IAM role, and kubectl is created with another IAM role, then make sure AWS CLI assumes the correct IAM role using environment variables, and use “aws sts get-caller-identity” to validate the IAM identity being used.

What about AKS in Azure

I touched on this in my Azure notes in 2021 and did a research again. Unfortunately, options are still fairly limited.

The first option is to use a managed service called “Azure Bastion”, which requires public IP and a dedicated subnet with the exact name of AzureBastionSubnet, as well as some additional requirement. I’m not impressed with these requirement because it is meant to be a managed service. The other option, is essentially to DIY a JumpBox. The idea is the same: put the jumpbox in a public subnet, which is routable to private subnets. When you need to connect to private VMs, get to the jumpbox first.

Apart from having to put the bastion VM on a public subnet, the pattern that we discussed above involving SOCKS5 proxy still works. Exposing a bastion host isn’t ideal but it still reduces attack surface significantly, comparing to exposing the cluster endpoints of all Kubernetes API servers.

Summary

Many immature Kubernetes configurations exposes private endpoint publicly. Having cluster endpoint in private subnet greatly improves security posture. In my opinion, there are very few situations where cluster endpoint must exposed publicly. Having private endpoint should be mandatory for all Kubernetes cluster. In the next post, I also cover how to create a ROSA cluster with private endpoint.

DICOM testing over TLS

Sat, 18 Feb 2023 01:05:00 -0400

I have two open-source projects to deploy a medical imaging application on different platforms. In both of them, I define DICOM validation scenario, and provide steps to test DICOM traffic with TLS. The steps have been working well, until a recent change in Envoy broke the testing, and led me to revisit the test scenario.

In a nutshell, I changed from dcm4che to dcmtk binary builds. I’ve also expanded the test case from a self-signed server certificate to one involving a self-signed CA. Although this test is about TLS for DICOM traffic, the principles apply to any traffic at TCP level. If you just need instruction for DICOM validation on Orthweb or Korthweb projects, skip the Background section.

Background

To test DICOM traffic with command line tool, I was investigating between dcm4che and dcmtk. Both are open-source projects with builds for multiple platforms. My DICOM test is as simple as a C-Echo command and a C-Store command using the tool, with TLS enabled. Once they work, other DICOM commands usually work as well.

I have been primarily using dcm4che as I was familiar with its previous version from my old job. For example, I can issue a C-ECHO with TLS using storescu command:

./storescu -c ORTHANC@ec2-54-243-91-148.compute-1.amazonaws.com:11112 --tls12 --tls-aes --trust-store server.truststore --trust-store-pass Password123!

To turn that test into a C-Store test, simply add a DCM file as input:

./storescu -c ORTHANC@ec2-54-243-91-148.compute-1.amazonaws.com:11112 --tls12 --tls-aes --trust-store server.truststore --trust-store-pass Password123! MY.DCM

The C-Store output tracks each DIMSE command and return codes. Note that in the command, we specify –tls12 as the version, and with –tls-aes switch we enabled AES or 3DES encryption. We also specified a file for trust store and password to the trust store.

This is when I first frowned over dcm4che. The dcm4che utility is a Java-based program we have to take an extra step of turning certificate into Java trust store. Different JVM versions may also cause different behaviours in the test. What later prompted me to switch to dcmtk is that with dcm4che I came across a weird error since Envoy proxy version 1.23, which impacted both Orthweb (Envoy proxy) and Korthweb (Istio Ingress).

Moreover, dcmtk is available as a HomeBrew package, Ubuntu package, and Debian package.

The test case, data and the tool

We can install dcmtk utility simply with brew install dcmtk, and then we need its echoscu and storescu commands with correct TLS options. The DICOM data I used for testing is a CT exam available for download here.

Before mocking with dcmtk‘s TLS options, we first need to understand what would be a good test. Previously I have used a single self-signed certificate on server. It is an over-simplified scenario that is far from a real-life certificate chain, and also does not test client certificate. If I also self-sign the client certificate, the client and server certificates are signed by entirely different parties and have no trust relationship, making it an invalid test case for client certificate.

For a full-blown testing with TLS, we should have two levels of CA as below:

The chart represents a typical hierarchy of three-level certificate authorities. Sometimes we need simplicity in our testing, and it is reasonable to simplify the diagram to the following, with one CA that issues certificate for both client and server:

Our DICOM validation testing will be based on both approaches depending on the project and deployment option. For Orthweb project and the Helm-chart driven option in Korthweb, we have one level of CA. For the GitOps and manual option in Korthweb, we have two levels of CA. When configuring testing, it is important to have the diagram above in mind.

In addition, we should also be aware of the limitation of the testing. As a personal project I will not pay for the certificates. I have to self-sign the certificate of the CA so there is no way to derive trust on this CA from another level. As a result, we must tell the client and server to trust the CA. The steps to create the needed certificates are:

Generate a key pair for Test CA. Generate the certificate for Test CA by self-signing its own public key
Generate a key pair for the (DICOM) server. Generate the certificate for the server by signing its public key with Test CA’s private key
Generate a key pair for the (DICOM) client. Generate the certificate for the client by signing its public key with Test CA’s private key

Because the client now also has its certificate, we can test with and without client certificate, using the following dcmtck switches:

-d (shorthand for –debug): print out detailed DICOM communication log. For succinct output, use -v (shorthand for –verbose) instead.
+tla (shorthand for –anonymous-tls): enable anonymous TLS (without client certificate)
+tls (shorthand for –enable-tls): enable full TLS (with client certificate), followed by client key and certificate files
-rc (shorthand for –require-peer-cert): –require-peer-cert, require peer (server) certificate
+cf (shorhand for –add-cert-file): –add-cert-file, add server certificate so client can trust it.

For C-ECHO, the testing commands with and without client certificate look like:

$ echoscu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tla -rc +cf ca.crt ec2-3-98-241-51.ca-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com 11112
$ echoscu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tls client.key client.crt -rc +cf ca.crt ec2-3-98-241-51.ca-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com 11112

For C-STORE, the testing commands with and without client certificate look like:

$ storescu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tla -rc +cf ca.crt ec2-3-98-241-51.ca-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com 11112 DICOM_Images/COVID/56364823.dcm
$ storescu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tls client.key client.crt -rc +cf ca.crt ec2-3-98-241-51.ca-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com 11112 DICOM_Images/COVID/56364823.dcm

As to how to create the certificates, in the post Creating X.509 TLS certificate in Kubernetes, I discussed different ways to create certificates for testing, including using openssl. In the next two sections, I will discuss them in further details.

Orthweb Test

The orthweb project runs Docker containers on an EC2 instance. In the cloud-init script of the EC2 instance, we self-sign a test CA with openssl. Then we create key and certificate for server and client respectively:

IssuerComName=issuer.orthweb.digihunch.com
ClientComName=dcmclient.orthweb.digihunch.com
ServerComName=ca-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com

openssl11 req -x509 -sha256 -newkey rsa:4096 -days 365 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=$IssuerComName/emailAddress=info@www.digihunch.com -keyout /tmp/ca.key -out /tmp/ca.crt

openssl11 req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=$ServerComName/emailAddress=orthweb@www.digihunch.com -addext extendedKeyUsage=serverAuth -addext subjectAltName=DNS:orthweb.digihunch.com,DNS:$IssuerComName -keyout /tmp/server.key -out /tmp/server.csr
openssl11 x509 -req -sha256 -days 365 -in /tmp/server.csr -CA /tmp/ca.crt -CAkey /tmp/ca.key -set_serial 01 -out /tmp/server.crt

openssl11 req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=$ClientComName/emailAddress=orthweb@www.digihunch.com -keyout /tmp/client.key -out /tmp/client.csr
openssl11 x509 -req -sha256 -days 365 -in /tmp/client.csr -CA /tmp/ca.crt -CAkey /tmp/ca.key -set_serial 01 -out /tmp/client.crt

When simulating DICOM activities from the client side, we supply the three files (ca.key, client.crt and client.key) to the echoscu and storescu executables, to issue DIMSE commands on top of TLS from client side, as shown in the previous section.

Korthweb Test

Currently, the Korthweb project deploys to Kubernetes cluster in three approaches, including two types of ingress controllers: Istio CRD (manual and GitOps deployment options) and Traefik CRD (Helm Chart driven deployment options). With both approaches, it is fairly straightforward to validate the HTTPS port. We export the CA certificate and run a curl command such as:

curl -HHost:web.orthweb.com -k -X GET https://web.orthweb.com:443/app/explorer.html -u admin:orthanc --cacert ca.crt

Note that by default, the curl command adds SNI (server name indication) extension by default to its TLS ClientHello Message (even without -HHost switch). It acts like a modern browser.

On the ingress controller side, most ingress controllers use SNI to drive request routing (because Host field in payload is encrypted). For example, Traefik Proxy has HostSNI matching rule. With Istio, the document states that: TLS implies the connection will be routed based on the SNI header to the destination. With DICOM traffic the Ingress also expects the client to make use of SNI extension in the TLS ClientHello message. The ingress supports multiple sites so the SNI even has an impact of which TLS certificate the ingress serves to the client. We can use openssl to examine which certificate an ingress serves. For example:

openssl s_client -showcerts -connect dicom.orthweb.com:11112 -servername dicom.orthweb.com < /dev/null
openssl s_client -showcerts -connect dicom.orthweb.com:11112 < /dev/null

The second command without -servername switch constructs an ClientHello message without SNI. The ingress may not have a clue of what certificate to serve, depending on its own implementation of TLS protocol. We can also force TLS version with a switch such as -tls1_2.

When it comes to open-source DICOM client, neither dcm4che or dcmtk puts SNI in the TLS request. This created some limitation with my testing. Luckily I do not have multiple routing destinations for now so I only need to direct all DICOM traffic to a service. When I use Istio ingress, I was able to set hosts to “*” so the Ingress does not care missing SNI extension in the client request. With Traefik proxy, I had to set sniStrict to false, and also forgo client certificate check.

The workaround is different per ingress implementation. Even worse, depending on what the available workaround can achieve, the testing steps vary as well.

For example, I perform DICOM validation (Istio ingress) with the steps below:

# bhs: generate client key pair
openssl req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=dcmclient.bhs.orthweb.com/emailAddress=dcmclient@www.digihunch.com -keyout bhs.client.key -out bhs.client.csr

# bhs: export intermediate CA credentials
kubectl -n bhs-orthweb get secret int-ca-secret -o jsonpath='{.data.tls\.key}' | base64 -d > bhs.int.ca.key
kubectl -n bhs-orthweb get secret int-ca-secret -o jsonpath='{.data.tls\.crt}' | base64 -d > bhs.int.ca.crt

# bhs: get intermediate CA to sign client cert 
openssl x509 -req -sha256 -days 365 -in bhs.client.csr -CA bhs.int.ca.crt -CAkey bhs.int.ca.key -set_serial 01 -out bhs.client.crt

# bhs: validate web request (without client certificate)
curl -HHost:web.bhs.orthweb.com -k -X GET https://web.bhs.orthweb.com:443/app/explorer.html -u admin:orthanc --cacert bhs.int.ca.crt

# bhs: validate DICOM c-echo request (with client certificate)
echoscu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tls bhs.client.key bhs.client.crt -rc +cf bhs.int.ca.crt dicom.bhs.orthweb.com 11112

# bhs: validate DICOM c-store request (with client certificate)
storescu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tls bhs.client.key bhs.client.crt -rc +cf bhs.int.ca.crt dicom.bhs.orthweb.com 11112 DICOM_CT/0001.dcm

On the other hand, for Traefik ingress, I have to use anonymous TLS without client certificate:

echoscu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tla -ic dicom.orthweb.com 11112
storescu -aet TESTER -aec ORTHANC -d +tla -ic dicom.orthweb.com 11112 DICOM_CT/123.dcm

The complexities with different test paths are consequences of the missing SNI capability in both DICOM toolkits. Unfortunately, the developers of the two DICOM tools are not aware of these consequences. I tried to contact dcmtk about this and will see what happens.

TLS profile

Another setting to pay close attention to is the security profile for TLS communication. These profiles defines the behaviours of dcmtk when it establishes TLS connection. The dcmtk has the following security profiles:

–profile-bcp195-nd (+py default): Non-downgrading BCP 195 TLS Profile
–profile-bcp195 (+px): BCP 195 TLS Profile
–profile-bcp195-ex (+pz): Extended BCP 195 TLS Profile
–profile-aes (+pa): AES TLS Secure Transport Connection Profile (retired)
–profile-null (+pn): Authenticated unencrypted communication (retired, was used in IHE ATNA)

The two at the bottom have been retired. The current profiles are all based on BCP195. BCP (best current practice) are sub-series of the corresponding RFC document series. The current revision of DICOM standard discusses bcp195-nd, bcp195 and bcp195-ex profiles in DICOM standard chapter PS 3.15 (B.9-B.11). For example, bcp195-nd requires that:

Implementation shall not negotiate TLS 1.0 or 1.1
Client and server shall prefer strict TLS configuration (as opposed to startTLS)
Ciphers that should be supported.
Recommend port 2762

These BCP profiles were incorporated into DICOM standard since 2018 and are all based on BCP195. BCP 195 states in section 3.6

3.6. Server Name Indication
TLS implementations MUST support the Server Name Indication (SNI)
extension defined in Section 3 of [RFC6066] for those higher-level
protocols that would benefit from it, including HTTPS. However, the
actual use of SNI in particular circumstances is a matter of local
policy.
Rationale: SNI supports deployment of multiple TLS-protected virtual
servers on a single address, and therefore enables fine-grained
security for these virtual servers, by allowing each one to have its
own certificate.

So technically, missing SNI is considered incompliant.

Summary

I find myself switching between dcmtk and dcm4che back and forth in the past. This time, I spent some time hoping to settle with the better tool this time. The effort is insightful but not fruitful. It is unfortunate to realize that neither supports SNI so I had to compromise the feature of my deployment. Hopefully one of those tools will catch up.

Creating X.509 TLS certificate for workload on Kubernetes

Sun, 29 Aug 2021 23:19:00 -0400

In deployment automation, I often had to create self-signed X.509 certificate for testing TLS traffic into Kubernetes. Sometimes self-signed, sometimes signed by a CA. This post summarized the approaches I’ve taken.

Create self-signed certificate with OpenSSL

Traditionally, this is done in three OpenSSL commands:

openssl req -x509 -sha256 -newkey rsa:4096 -keyout ca.key -out ca.crt -days 356 -nodes -subj '/CN=Health Certificate Authority'
openssl req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -keyout server.key -out server.csr -nodes -subj '/CN=*.orthweb.com'
openssl x509 -req -sha256 -days 365 -in server.csr -CA ca.crt -CAkey ca.key -set_serial 01 -out server.crt

I have an older post to cover the basics of cryptography in TLS certificate and PKI. In the three commands above, the first produces a private key and self-signed certificate for a CA. The second creates a private key and a CSR for the web site. The third one uses the CA’s signing private key to sign the CSR from the website. The output is the certificate for the website.

Workloads running in Kubernetes typically consume certificates stored in Kubernetes Secret. The cons of this approach is that it usually requires an extra step to import the certificate files into Kubernetes Secret. For example:

kubectl create -n orthweb secret generic orthweb-cred --from-file=tls.key=server.key --from-file=tls.crt=server.crt --from-file=ca.crt=ca.crt

Note, people use the term self-signed certificate loosely. It sometimes means literally a certificate that is self-signed, like the one generated above. Sometimes, I had to self-sign a CA, then use the CA to sign one certificate for the server and one for the client. Because the application being tested requires that the client and server’s certificates both under the same CA. This would involve a few more commands, for example:

# Self-sign a CA
openssl req -x509 -sha256 -newkey rsa:4096 -days 365 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=issuer.digihunch.com/emailAddress=info@www.digihunch.com -keyout /tmp/ca.key -out /tmp/ca.crt

# Generate a CSR for server
openssl req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=server.digihunch.com/emailAddress=orthweb@www.digihunch.com -addext extendedKeyUsage=serverAuth -addext subjectAltName=DNS:orthweb.digihunch.com,DNS:server2.digihunch.com -keyout /tmp/server.key -out /tmp/server.csr

# Use the self-signed CA to issue a certificate to the server
openssl x509 -req -sha256 -days 3650 -in /tmp/server.csr -CA /tmp/ca.crt -CAkey /tmp/ca.key -set_serial 01 -out /tmp/server.crt -extfile <(echo subjectAltName=DNS:orthweb.digihunch.com,DNS:server2.digihunch.com)

# Generate a CSR for clietn
openssl req -new -newkey rsa:4096 -nodes -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=client.digihunch.com/emailAddress=client@www.digihunch.com -keyout /tmp/client.key -out /tmp/client.csr

# Use the self-signed CA to issue a certificate to the client
openssl x509 -req -sha256 -days 365 -in /tmp/client.csr -CA /tmp/ca.crt -CAkey /tmp/ca.key -set_serial 01 -out /tmp/client.crt

In the example above, it is important to note that even though the server’s CSR contains subject alternative name (SAN), I still have to specify the SAN again when signing the certificate for the server.

Similar to OpenSSL there are other toolkits such as CFSSL that supports specifying configuration files. However, the steps in Shell command are generally not always easy to automate.

Create self-signed certificate with Helm

Moving to the context of workload deployment in Kubernetes, running openSSL command isn’t always a viable option. For example, generating a certificate in the middle of deployment using a Helm Chart.

In Helm, template functions is for this purpose. In my Korthweb project I used genSignedCert to create self-signed certificate and then store the key, certificate and CA certificate as Kubernetes Secret:

{{- $dbtlscert := genSignedCert .Values.dbtls.certCommonName nil (list .Values.dbtls.certCommonName) 365 $ca }}
apiVersion: v1
kind: Secret
metadata:
 name: {{ .Values.dbtls.certCommonName | quote }}
 namespace: {{ $.Release.Namespace | quote }}
type: kubernetes.io/tls
data:
 tls.crt: {{ $dbtlscert.Cert | b64enc | quote }}
 tls.key: {{ $dbtlscert.Key | b64enc | quote }}
 ca.crt: {{ $ca.Cert | b64enc | quote }}
{{- end }}

The cons of this approach is that the syntax is not straightforward. As indicated in Helm documentation: Helm Chart templates are written in the Go template language, with the addition of 50 or so add-on template functions from the Sprig library and a few other specialized functions. While we talk about the “Helm template language” as if it is Helm-specific, it is actually a combination of the Go template language, some extra functions, and a variety of wrappers to expose certain objects to the templates. Many resources on Go templates may be helpful as you learn about templating.

Create self-signed certificate with Cert-Manager

The Cert Manager project is very popular to produce X.509 certificates directly in Kubernetes secret. We can install cert manager using Helm:

kubectl create namespace cert-manager
helm repo add jetstack https://charts.jetstack.io
helm install cert-manager jetstack/cert-manager --namespace cert-manager --version v1.0.3 --set installCRDs=true
kubectl get pods -n cert-manager
kubectl get crd | grep cert-manager.io

Alternatively, FluxCD’s documentation on Kustomization dependency uses Cert Manager as an example. It is a good way of installing cert-manager if you have GitOps pattern.

Creating self-signed certificate for website is fairly simple. It starts with bootstrapping a CA issuer. Take the manifest below as an example. When creating the first certificate, make sure to specify isCA=true, so it stores the signing private key along with its own certificate in the ca-secret. Then use the newly created CA as issuer to create the X.509 certificate for the website.

apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: ClusterIssuer
metadata:
 name: selfsigned-issuer
spec:
 selfSigned: {}
---
apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: Certificate
metadata:
 name: my-ca
 namespace: orthweb
spec:
 isCA: true
 commonName: my-ca
 secretName: ca-secret
 privateKey:
 algorithm: ECDSA
 size: 256
 issuerRef:
 name: selfsigned-issuer
 kind: ClusterIssuer
 group: cert-manager.io
---
apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: Issuer
metadata:
 name: my-ca-issuer
 namespace: orthweb
spec:
 ca:
 secretName: ca-secret
---
apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: Certificate
metadata:
 name: orthweb-cert
 namespace: orthweb
spec:
 commonName: orthweb.com
 secretName: orthweb-secret
 duration: 2160h
 renewBefore: 72h
 subject:
 organizations:
 - digihunch
 dnsNames:
 - web.orthweb.com
 - dcm.orthweb.com
 privateKey:
 algorithm: ECDSA
 size: 256
 issuerRef:
 name: my-ca-issuer
 kind: Issuer
 group: cert-manager.io

The site certificate is directly stored in Kubernetes Secret as specified in the secretName field. To fetch the certificate text, we need to decode the secret entry, for example:

kubectl -n orthweb get secret orthweb-secret -o jsonpath='{.data.ca\.crt}' | base64 -d

Note that the example above uses ECDSA algorithm with size 256 for private key and certificate. It requires that the TLS client to support ECDSA algorithm as well. For more supportability, you can use RSA algorithm (2048 or 4096 size).

In addition to creating self-signed certificate, Cert Manager supports a number of other issuer types. For example, the support of ACME issuer type enables integration with Let’s Encrypt.

Cert Manager can secure Kubernetes Ingress resources with a sub-component called ingress-shim. It is configured via annotation on the Ingress resource.

Cert Manager

Create CA-signed certificate manually

For a certificate signed by a CA, there are may paid options, from manual, to self-help, to automated. The classic manual way is using OpenSSL, generating key, CSR. The CA takes CSR to sign a X.509 certificate returned to the website administration.

Many CA websites charges for a fee and makes it easy. For example, this site currently uses certificate from SSLs.com. Apart from the fee-for-cert option, there is a website named “SSL for free“, a CA with free option for 90-day single-domain, non-wildcard certificate and we can request it simply on their website, with proof of domain ownership.

The other popular free option is Let’s Encrypt, which also employs ACME protocol. The protocol requires ACME challenges to be satisfied in order to proof domain ownership. There are a few types of challenges:

HTTP-01 challenge
DNS-01 challenge
TLS-SNI-01 challenge
TLS-ALPN-01 challenge

I have used the HTTP-01 and DNS-01 challenges. The DNS-01 challenge requires adding TXT records to DNS configuration. The HTTP-01 challenge requires adding a DNS A-record to resolve to the server, then two URIs with pre-defined value.

When I first set up this site I used certbot (the client program for letsencrypt) to create certificate every 90 days from the wordpress server, following this guide, including solving DNS-01 challenges.

Create CA-signed certificate automatically with cert manager and letsencrypt

With Kubernetes, cert-manager has the ability to integrate with let’s encrypt for full automation. Here is a good blog post on this. Domain verification is still required but it can be done automatically. We first need to register an A record that resolves host name to the Ingress IP to enable this automation. The domain ownership validation may use the ACME protocol. This should also work on private networks with private DNS and ACME protocol using a private boulder server.

Take domain name demo1.digihunch.com for example, if ingress exposes a public IP address which the domain name resolves to, then we can configure certificate with the following manifest:

kind: IngressClass
metadata:
 name: istio
spec:
 controller: istio.io/ingress-controller
---
apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: ClusterIssuer
metadata:
 name: letsencrypt
spec:
 acme:
 privateKeySecretRef:
 name: letsencrypt
 server: https://acme-staging-v02.api.letsencrypt.org/directory
 solvers:
 - http01:
 ingress:
 class: istio
---
apiVersion: cert-manager.io/v1
kind: Certificate
metadata:
 name: demo
spec:
 dnsNames:
 - demo1.digihunch.com
 issuerRef:
 kind: ClusterIssuer
 name: letsencrypt
 secretName: demo-tls

This example uses Istio as ingress controller but the method works regardless of the controller technology behind Ingress. In the ClusterIssuer object, we’re telling it to use the staging server from letsencrypt. We also specify http01 as challenge type, and that the ingress type is istio. In the Certificate object, we provided dnsName and specified ClusterIssuser. We also tell it to store the credentials to a secret named demo-tls.

When we apply the resources above, the ClusterIssuer connects to letsencrypt server via ACME protocol. Since the DNS name already resolves to the Public IP that the ingress is hosting, the ClusterIssuer configures the required Ingress, Services and Pods accordingly so the token to satisfy the challenge is presented at the designated URI. Instead of a staging server, we can also use production ACME server for production deployment. Note that the production ACME endpoint has a stricter rate limit.

When the ACME validation is in progress, it is important to ensure that port 80 is open and there is no other mechanism (such as routing rule, authorization requirement, mandatory redirect to 443) that blocks access from letsencrypt server.

Bottom line

Cert Manager is deployed in Kubernetes, supporting a variety of issuer types. As a Kubernetes-native tool, it is a no-brainer for Kubernetes workload for X.509 certificate. Compared with using template function in Helm, it is not dependent on template function and the syntax is consistent (YAML). Compared with OpenSSL or other binary tools, it is easy to integrate with the platform.

Secure web application deployment

Sun, 16 May 2021 15:19:41 -0400

In Nov 2020, I created OrthWeb project, a deployment of Orthanc’s server. Orthanc is a DICOM viewer and repo shipped in Docker container. In the deployment project, I use Terraform to provision infrastructure, including a managed PostgreSQL instance, an EC2 instance for docker runtime, and the init script to bring up the web service. I whipped up the project for a demo, and skipped some security configurations. For example, the password was stored in clear text in Terraform configuration. The web certificate is stored in the repository. I recently had some time to fix that. My effort leads up to the conclusion that this requires a better platform (i.e. managed Kubernetes cluster). So I wanted to note down how I got there.

Secret store

In AWS, both parameter store and secret manager can act as secret store. Secrets manager comes at higher cost but some additional features, such as built-in password generator, secret rotation, and cross-account access. We use Secret Manager but we generate password within Terraform because we need to specify password during database provisioning. Secret store requires certain special characters to be eliminated. Terraform can specify the special characters allowed. For EC2 instance to pull from secret manager, the following entities are needed:

A secret store
A VPC endpoint to expose secret store to subnet via private route.
The VPC endpoint needs its own security group
The instance profile of the EC2 instance must contain an IAM role to get secret value
The security group of EC2 instance needs to allow traffic to secret store
The script from EC2 instance uses VPC endpoint

This is a common pattern for interaction between computing object and VPC endpoint. The details are in compute.tf, network.tf, secgrp.tf and secret.tf. The secret name needs to be partially randomized to avoid naming conflict with deactivated secrets.

Passing Secret to container

Here is an example CLI command to pull secret:

$ aws secretsmanager get-secret-value --secret-id DatabaseCreds51c1db4172ae9c54 --query SecretString --output text --endpoint-url https://vpce-0897b168cf1c60df2-khx32o7f.secretsmanager.us-east-1.vpce.amazonaws.com | jq -r .password

The connection is made via private network route (whether the instance is in public or private subnet). Traffic is encrypted in TLS. Once in the operating system, the secret is available as standard output and can be stored to file, or saved in environment variable.

My first attempted approach is docker’s secret store and config so that I do not have to store secret in plain text on the file system. I eventually give up this approach due to several hiccups. First, secret and config are part of Docker swarm service. So it requires initializing docker swarm before I could port in the secret, with the following command:

$ docker swarm init
$ echo mdbuser123 | docker secret create db_un -
$ echo m1p@ssw0rd | docker secret create db_pw -
$ echo 10.2.32.41 | docker config create db_ep -

The content of the secret and config are presented as files to the container file system at different locations, as can be verified this way:

$ docker service create --name="redis" --secret=db_un --secret=db_pw --config=db_ep redis:alpine
$ docker container ls
$ docker exec -it c8ed2a278ca8 sh
# cat /db_ep
# cat /run/secrets/db_un
# cat /run/secrets/db_pw

This is a great way to pass secret and config to container applications. However, since the values are stored as content of file, the main application must be able to load file content as its own configuration value. In my specific scenario, the application expects explicit value in its configuration file, or environment variable.

On the other hand, Docker document states that docker secrets do not set environment variables directly. this was a conscous decision, because env var can unintentionally be leaked between containers. In other word I could present secrets as files but the application cannot use it. There is potentially a workaround here which is great function wise but an additional layer of complexity.

Moreover, I later discovered that this isn’t even a viable approach if I use docker compose. This is because I must declare those entries from secret store or config store as external, and external secrets are not even available to containers created by docker-compose.

With reluctance, I store the config and secret keys and values to a file, and use the env_file section in docker compose to import them as environment variables. The application can pick up environment variables as configuration values.

X509 Certificate

We use a self-signed X509 certificate, along with the private key. The creation is straightforward. However, when I tested on Mac, the browser does not load the page for this reason. Since macOS 10.15, the certificate requires several extensions: ExtendedKeyUsage, Subject alternative names and DNS name. The native openssl from the operating system is outdated (v 1.0.2) and I had to install openssl11 package and create it as follows:

openssl11 req -x509 -nodes -days 365 -newkey rsa:2048 -keyout /tmp/private.key -out /tmp/certificate.crt -subj /C=CA/ST=Ontario/L=Waterloo/O=Digihunch/OU=Imaging/CN=digihunch.com/emailAddress=info@3.237.97.93 -addext extendedKeyUsage=serverAuth -addext subjectAltName=DNS:orthweb.digihunch.com,DNS:digihunch.com

The Mac uses libreSSL backed openSSL utility and can achieve the same with slightly different command line argument.

Next Step

The limitation with passing secret concerns me and I’m looking to move to managed Kubernetes platform where secrets can be ported to environment variable of Pods. We can also consider ECS in AWS which allows to inject sensitive data from secret manager to container.

Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) – Introduction

Thu, 08 Apr 2021 22:07:00 -0400

A public-key infrastructure (PKI) is a set of roles, policies, hardware, software and procedures needed to create, manage, distribute, use, store and revoke digital certificates and manage public-key encryption. The algorithms are based on Publick-key cryptography. The format of the digital certificate is defined in X.509 standard.

Certificate Authority – CA digitally signs and publishes the public key to user. Website requesting certificates start with a key pair. It then converts public key into CSR (certificate signing request), including the identity. Once the identity of requestor is validated, CA will sign the public key of requestor, using its own private key. The output of this is the certificate.

Registration Authority – CA may delegate some roles to registration authority (RA). RA is responsible for accepting requests for certificates and authenticating the entity making the request. However, RAs do not have the signing authority of a CA. Note that Microsoft may have referred to a subordinate CA as an RA, which is incorrect according to X.509 PKI standards.

Validation types

Domain Validation: domain ownerships is usually verified via DNS record.
Organization Validation: the organization name and address are verified and put into the certificate.
Extended Validation: verifies existence and location of the legal entity, as well as domain ownership. EV cannot be issued as a wildcard certificate.

Private Certificate Authorities

You can create private CA and use it to sign certificates. Your user need to manually install and trust your private CA so that all certificates issued from the CA will inherit that trust. For revocation, you will also need to maintain an HTTP server for the certificate revocation list, or an OCSP responder.

Certificate Revocation List (CRL)

SSL certificates include information on how to access a certificate revocation list. Client will download and check this list to make sure the certificate has not been revoked. This mechanism has largely been replaced by OCSP responders.

Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP)

The OCSP protocol is a replacement for CRLs, with the benefit of being more real-time and requiring less bandwidth. The general operation is similar: clients are to query to OCSP responder to check if a certificate has been revoked.

Commercial vs non-profit CA

	Commercial (e.g. SSLs.com)	Non-profit (e.g. Let’s Encrypt)
Validation	DV, OV and EV	DV only
Wildcard	Supported	Supported (using DNS-01 challenge via ACME v2)
Cost	Not Free	Free
Expiration	1-3 years	90 days

ACME protocol

Traditionally, there are several command-line utilities such as openssl, cfssl, or keytool (Java) to manage certificate related tasks. The process are mostly manual. The Internet Security Research Group (ISRG) developed the ACME (Automated Certificate management Environment) protocol.

In this protocol, there is a certificate management agent (client) on the given web server. The agent generates a key pair and shares it with the CA at the outset of the validation process. Once validation is finished and the agent is verified as the proven owner of the key pair. It can use its key to digitally sign the CSRs it generates and sends to the CA via HTTPS requests. The CA uses the CSR, along with its associated public key, to issue the certificate and send it back to the agent. The agent downloads and installs it, then notifies the designated contact. The agent can be automated to check in with the CA at given intervals to rotate certificates and keys.

Let’s encrypt adopts ACME protocol by using Boulder on the server side, and the most commonly used client is certbot. Smallstep also introduced ACME support in step CA in 2019.

Lets Encrypt

I have used let’s encrypt several times because it is free and easy to manage with certbot, which can be installed using brew on Mac. Here’s how I quickly generate certificate manually:

DOMAIN=orthwebdemo.digihunch.com
echo $DOMAIN
sudo certbot -d $DOMAIN --manual --preferred-challenges dns certonly
# get ready to change txt record
ls /etc/letsencrypt/live/orthwebdemo.digihunch.com/

The --manual switch starts interactive prompts, which includes configuring TXT record and wait for the update.

Open source implementations

Here is a list of open-source implementations of PKI management:

OpenSSL: classic tool for PKI management. The Mac/BSD implementation and GNU implementation are slightly different.
Keytool: Java’s Key and Certificate Management Tool that supports formats used in Java
Cfssl: introduced by CloudFlare to simplify the PKI management process. On Ubuntu, the apt package name is golang-cfssl
Hashicorp Vault: CA, secret management and encryption.
Boulder: implemented in Go based on ACME protocol. Let’s Encrypt uses Boulder on the server side.
EJBCA: a full-featured, enterprise-grade implementation in Java, managed by Swedish company PrimeKey Solutions AB.

Managed CA as service

AWS Certificate Manager: [Update] as of Sep 2022, the managed CA capability was spun off as a new service called AWS Private Certificate Authority, to distinguish from the certificate management capability.
EJBCA Enterprise, as Azure Market place
Google Cloud Certificate Authority Service API

Automatic deployment of Orthanc on AWS

Sun, 08 Nov 2020 00:54:06 -0400

[Update] I changed reverse proxy from Nginx to Envoy. Here‘s the detail.

[Update] Some security improvement was introduced in may 2021. Here‘s detail.

[Update] Here’s the link to the orthweb repository.

In this project we introduce a medical imaging web service based on Orthanc, an open-source project of DICOM server, and a pipeline to deploy such server automatically and consistently. We deploy Orthanc on AWS automatically. This little project involves a number of technical deets in DevOps, to deliver a web application prototype with an automated deployment pipeline.

A brief on imaging

In medical imaging, scanning devices are the data collectors. It consists of various categories of scanners, such as Computed Tomography (CT), and Ultrasound (US). They are collectively referred to as modality, but vary significantly in terms of image generation and hardware manufacturing. The challenges to exchange data between these heterogeneous scanning devices and centralized computers came around as early as the 1980s, which brought about ACR-NEMA standard in 1985, under the initiative between American College Radiology (ACR) and National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). The standard lately evolved into DICOM (Digital Imaging Communication in Medicine), a comprehensive set of standard in the ISO framework that governs modern imaging data storage and exchange across several disciplines (radiology, cardiology, pathology, etc) that operate around images in medicine.

In addition to defining a file format to store imaging data, DICOM also includes an upper layer protocol that dictates how two compliant devices (referred as application entity, each identified by AE title) can negotiate a common syntax to transfer objects (e.g. an image, a report or a discovery). Upper layer refers to layer 5-7 in OSI model, or application layer in TCP/IP model.

Imaging server

Once scanner acquires images from patient, they stores the exams to imaging server for persistent storage. The functionalities of such server expands overtime since 1990s and hence go by different names in different eras, such as PACS (Picture Archive and Communication Systems), VNA (Vendor Neutral Archive) and EI (enterprise imaging) archive. Regardless of naming, they can be generally seen as a highly specialized variation of enterprise content management system. They are usually hosted with a centralized database to index clinical information at patient, exam and image levels. The other key component is the persistent storage devices, usually in the form of a NAS.

Orthanc is an open-source initiative for such imaging servers. It provides a DICOM endpoint, allowing scanning devices to store medical images. It also provides a web viewer allowing users to see the images stored. It is released for many platforms, including Docker images.

Infrastructure as code

We use Amazon Web Service (AWS) for infrastructure as service, and Terraform as the tool to provision resources off AWS, in a reliable and consistent mechanism, known as Infrastructure-as-Code. Terraform is an alternative to CloudFormation, AWS’s proprietary infrastructure-as-code technology. Terraform is developed by Hashicorp as an open-source project, and therefore is vendor neutral. It supports multiple public cloud vendor through different providers. Each provider accesses the vendor specific SDK. For example, the AWS provider integrates with AWS SDK. As a result, the code used in one vendor cannot just be applied to a different vendor without a major overhaul. Terraform’s current version is 0.13 as of Oct 2020, and has gone through some syntax changes since version 0.11. Terraform also produces files for state management locally in the working directory.

When executing, Terraform combines all files in the working directory to assess variables, and create required resources. It is compatible with the most of AWS resources. For example, you can specify user data with templates when creating EC2 instances. You can also create managed service instance as long as it is supported by the provider.

Architecture

Orthanc web server stores data in sqlite by default, but also has a plugin to support PostgreSQL, an open-source relational database. AWS has managed service (RDS) based on PostgreSQL. In this project, we create an RDS instance that span across two availability zones for minimum high availability. Orthanc also supports storing imaging data including pixels in PostgreSQL, which obviates the need for a dedicated file storage system.

We deploy the application in Docker’s containers for compatibility and portability. The Orthanc server is shipped in Docker images, available in Docker hub registry. The docker environment is configured as part of EC2 instance bootstrapping, including installing packages with YUM, initializing and customizing environment variables. The docker-compose file, and the auxiliary configuration files are provided in the repo. The bootstrapping script installs git and pulls required files from this GitHub repo.

This demo project does not include load balancing, DNS management, or container orchestration.

Security

Orthanc’s web browser natively supports HTTPS. However, the DICOM port does not support TLS natively, as their development has made clear in the FAQ. This leaves a severe security vulnerability because all patient data (protected health information in HIPPA context) would be sent across the Internet in the clear, visible to every network interface along the route. To address this issue we brought in Nginx as a reverse proxy to work at TCP layer to terminate encrypted traffic for Orthanc’s DICOM end point. DICOM upper layer works on top of TCP layer.

In Nginx literature, this use case is referred to as SSL Termination for TCP Upstream Servers. Note that Nginx is providing layer 4 capability in this use case so the certificate and key configuration should not be placed under http section of the configuration file. This layer 4 capability in fact enables security configurations of all protocol that operates in upper layers and can be used in a broad range of situations. It is also noteworthy that Nginx can re-encrypt the traffic on the way out to upstream, for even tighter security control measure as outlined in this use case.

user nginx;
worker_processes 1;

error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log warn;
pid /var/run/nginx.pid;

events {
 worker_connections 1024;
}

stream {
 upstream dicom_backend {
 server orthanc-backend:4242;
 }

 server {
 listen 11112 ssl;
 proxy_pass dicom_backend;

 ssl_certificate conf.d/site.pem;
 ssl_certificate_key conf.d/site.pem;
 ssl_protocols SSLv3 TLSv1 TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3;
 ssl_ciphers HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5:ECDH+AESGCM;
 ssl_session_cache shared:SSL:20m;
 ssl_session_timeout 4h;
 ssl_handshake_timeout 30s;
 }
}

It is also helpful to use Nginx to terminate HTTPS traffic, using a pair of certificate and key. When testing with self-signed certificate I realized that Chrome browser has specific requirement on self-signed certificate, or it won’t load the page. So the certificate has to be created as instructed here.

For better security, it is advisable that the RDS instance is provisioned in private subnet, with its data encrypted both in-transit and at-rest. Docker service should also manage sensitive information as secrets.

Summary

The deliverable is stored in this Github repo. The docker part of it can be executed on MacBook with PostgreSQL. The entire hardware stack represented by terraform code, can be executed against AWS to create required resources. Checkout README for further instruction. To emulate a modality, one will need a TLS supported DICOM application entity, Horos is a great project on MacOS to serve this purpose, both as DICOM-compliant sender and a viewer. Alternatively, consider some command-line based DICOM toolkit such as dcmtk, or grassroot dicom.

Cryptography basics 2 of 2

Sun, 08 Sep 2019 21:21:41 -0400

My previous post outlines several core concepts around cryptography, such as asymmetric key encryption, digital certificate, the encoding formats and relevant file extensions. In this article, we continue to explore cryptography use cases, where these concepts are connected and put into application.

The most important use case is TLS handshake. I cannot stress enough how paramount this scenario is. This use case and its variation can be found in almost every situation where connection needs to be secured.

TLS handshake: the process in which client and server establish secure connection. During the handshake, two parties agree on TLS version, decide on cipher suite, authenticate the identity of each other (although client identity authentication is less common), and generate session key for symmetric encryption after the handshake. Details steps are very important. Here is a fairly thorough reference, and here is a great diagram:

TLS handshake

Secure browser connection: The most widespread use of TLS handshake is to secure browser connection with HTTPS:

Browser initiates connection to the server;
Server sends browser its certificate (public key + digital signature signed by CA);
Browser has preloaded public key of CA and uses it to decrypt digital signature and get the digest of public key;
Browser calculate digest of received public key and compares it against the digest from the previous step;
If the result is the same, public key is trusted, a green lock is displayed; otherwise, a warning is displayed;
proceed to the rest of the steps in TLS handshake.

Secure connection in Java: Java applications manages keys and certificates through two classes: java.security.KeyStore and java.security.TrustStore. Suppose a Java application client initiates TLS connection to server. The server application will present its certificates from server’s Key Store. The client will use certificates stored in client’s Trust Store to verify the identity of the server. Once validated, the client then presents certificates stored in client’s Key Store back to the server for validation.

A KeyStore keeps keys and certificates for your own application. Typically, you store a KeyPair in a KeyStore file.
A TrustStore keeps the certificates of external systems that your application trusts.

Below is a great diagram:

Secure Java application in TLS

JKS file is Java’s version of PKCS#12 (private key + certificate, password protected). Entries in a JKS file must have an “alias” that is unique. The JKS file type can be used for both Key Store and Trust Store. When it’s used in Key Store, it contains a certificate and private key for the Java application. When it’s used in Trust Store, it only contains certificate from external trusted applications. Note that JKS is the default keystore format until Java 8. Since Java 9 the default keystore format is PKCS12.

Finally, we can introduce some tools:

Command line Tools

openssl is a versatile tool for cryptography and keytool is a similar tool for Java applications.

keytool is for store keys/certificates in Java Key Store or Trust Store.

Conclusion

I do not include any openssl or keytool command in this article in order to remain theoretical. However, once through the conceptual hurdles, one should become fairly comfortable picking up the tools and understand why each command is needed to achieve its purpose.