devpi-dev December 2019

Download

devpi-dev@python.org

3 participants
2 discussions

PEP 458: Secure transport independent download integrity for PyPI packages
by Sumana Harihareswara 13 Feb '20

13 Feb '20

Hi, devpi folks! I figure you might want to take a look at the PyPI security PEP currently being discussed, since I could imagine devpi wanting to also add TUF metadata handling for packages, and in case there are interoperability concerns/questions. https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-458-surviving-a-compromise-of-pypi/2648/ The PEP authors are revising the proposed summary, title, etc., per https://github.com/secure-systems-lab/peps/blob/c13384a4fac6822626abb7e09ab… : > Attacks on software repositories are common, even in organizations with very good security practices__. The resulting repository compromise allows an attacker to edit all files stored on the repository and sign these files using any keys stored on the repository (online keys). In many signing schemes (like TLS), this access allows the attacker to replace files on the repository and make it look like these files are coming from PyPI. Without a way to revoke and replace the trusted private key, it is very challenging to recover from a repository compromise. In addition to the dangers of repository compromise, software repositories are vulnerable to an attacker on the network (MITM) intercepting and changing files. These and other attacks on software repositories are detailed here__. This PEP aims to protect users of PyPI from compromises of the integrity, consistency and freshness properties of PyPI packages, and enhances compromise resilience, by mitigating key risk and providing mechanisms to recover from a compromise of PyPI or its signing keys. In addition to protecting direct users of PyPI, this PEP aims to provide similar protection for users of PyPI mirrors. > To provide compromise resilient protection of PyPI, this PEP proposes the use of The Update Framework [2]_ (TUF). ..... > This PEP describes changes to the PyPI infrastructure that are needed to ensure that users get valid packages from PyPI. ... > __ https://github.com/theupdateframework/pip/wiki/Attacks-on-software-reposito… > __ https://theupdateframework.github.io/security.html Discussion should probably be directed to the Discourse thread at discuss.python.org ; this is just a heads-up. -- Sumana Harihareswara Changeset Consulting sh(a)changeset.nyc

1 1

Need help with reverse proxy config and Devi-Web
by Nicholas Williams 19 Dec '19

19 Dec '19

I'm having trouble with a reverse-proxy config and could use some assistance. We have the following setup: LOAD BALANCER Accepts requests via the official hostname and HTTPS (port 443) Forwards requests to Devpi Nginx server Sends headers X-Forwaded-Port, X-Forwarded-Host, X-Forwarded-Proto matching the official hostname, HTTPS, and 443. DEVPI NGINX SERVER Accepts requests via port 80 Serves requests for +f files directly (works perfectly) Forwards remaining requests to Devpi Python server DOES NOT override headers X-Forwaded-Port, X-Forwarded-Host, X-Forwarded-Proto (I have those proxy_set_header values from the recommended nginx.conf commented out so that Nginx doesn't override them) DOES NOT send header X-Outside-Url (I also have that commented out) The behavior is that all links, CSS tags, and JavaScript tags point to http://localhost/... instead of https://the.correct.domain.name/... What do I need to change to make Devpi properly use the X-Forwaded-Port, X-Forwarded-Host, X-Forwarded-Proto headers coming from the load balancer? Thanks, Nick

2 2