[Ovmsdev] Request For Comments - Wireguard VPN

Michael Geddes frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net
Mon May 1 09:38:57 HKT 2023


Hey Ludovic,

I noticed this change come through, and it's exciting to see all these
libraries being updated to the latest!  I also noticed I have the following
config:

CONFIG_MG_SSL_IF_WOLFSSL=
CONFIG_OVMS_SC_GPL_WOLF=y

Do you know what I cain by using WOLFSSL config?  I'm happy to try it.

//.ichael

On Mon, 1 May 2023 at 03:39, Ludovic LANGE <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr> wrote:

> Thanks Mark, it's perfect.
>
> I've just reapplied the original patches from Stephen here :
> https://github.com/openvehicles/wolfssl/pull/1
>
> Once those are reviewed and merged, I'll upgrade the baseline PR for
> WolfSSL migration to submodule (and convert it from draft to final PR).
>
> Thanks in advance !
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Le 30/04/2023 à 10:28, Mark Webb-Johnson a écrit :
>
> I think this is done. Please try, and let me know if ok for you now.
>
> Regards, Mark.
>
> On 29 Apr 2023, at 4:44 AM, Ludovic LANGE <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr>
> <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Thanks for the 2 repos.
>
> Regarding the versions, I had success with wolfssl until 5.3.0. After that
> version, source code compatibility is still OK but I had crashes in SSH
> sessions (stack overflow).
>
> So I did some baseline PRs with the same versions we had before
> (4.7.0/1.4.6) ; then other ones to increase up to 5.3.0 / 1.4.13:
>
>    - Baseline:
>       - WolfSSH 1.4.6 :
>       https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/885
>       - WolfSSL : (draft in-progress, it's missing 2 patches from our
>       repo that are needed - at least one for compilation - with v4.7.0)
>       - Upgrades:
>       - WolfSSH up to 1.4.10 :
>       https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/886
>          - I'll prepare an upgrade to the latest but some changes are
>          needed that I need to test on all releases.
>          - (For WolfSSL I'll prepare the upgrade later)
>
> That way we can revert the "upgrade" commits without going back to the
> module / submodule commit + we do not introduce doubts/regressions with the
> submodule operation.
>
>
> Please note: in the WolfSSL fork the tags are missing ; could you please
> fetch them and push them ? Thanks in advance.
>
> Please also create - for WolfSSL still - a dedicated branch
> `v4.7.0-stable-ovms` so that I can apply the missing patches (mainly a
> workaround for a define SHA_CTX + some changes from Stephen
> (WOLFSSL_SMALL_STACK))
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> PS: If you have some time, and want to review my other pendings PRs:
> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+author%3Allange+draft%3Afalse
> I believe they can be reviewed / applied independently should you wish so.
>
> Le 28/04/2023 à 07:37, Mark Webb-Johnson a écrit :
>
>
> I’ve forked the two wolf repos:
>
>
>    - https://github.com/openvehicles/wolfssl
>    - https://github.com/openvehicles/wolfssh
>
>
> However, those are the latest versions (5.6.0 and 1.4.13 respectively) so
> I am not certain of compatibility with our code base, or how hard it would
> be to integrate those. We can always branch+tag earlier versions closer to
> ours if too hard. Our previous wolfSSH was v1.4.6 (February 3, 2021), and wolfSSL
> Release 4.7.0 (February 16, 2021). From my understanding, WolfSSH requires
> the crypt parts of WolfSSL to build.
>
> Doing it this way, and bringing these in as submodules to our code, would
> be the best way to maintain compatibility with upstream. If it is really
> too difficult (given the number of changes Stephen made to get this to
> work), we can always just roll back to committing the existing versions
> directly to those GitHub repositories and making them submodules.
>
> Could you have a try and see if that is possible?
>
> Regards, Mark.
>
> On 26 Apr 2023, at 2:26 PM, Ludovic LANGE <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr>
> <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I'm going to add the missing parts for the main tunnel (new config items
> to a) auto-start + b) to register as a default route if wanted).
>
> For the "manual" commands I'll experiment with these. I like the idea of
> having a quick remote access for troubleshooting purposes.
>
>
> Regarding wolf*, yes, I do think that would be the best idea - to have
> these as submodules.
>
> I intend to "relocate" those modules as subfolders of the component in my
> patches:
> components/wolfssh
> ├── CMakeLists.txt
> ├── README.md
> ├── component.mk
> └── wolfssh
>     ├── ChangeLog.md
>     ├── LICENSING
>     ├── Makefile.am
>     ├── README
>     ├── ....
>     ...
>
> This way, we can manage our "glue" code ( CMakeLists.txt and component.mk
> ) without interfering with the external component. I believe that it keeps
> a proper separation between "our code" and "upstream code", making it easy
> to upstream patches and/or to rebase to a newer release.
> Especially given that some of these external components now have their own
> CMakeLists.txt - not easily re-usable for our build structure.
>
> If you're OK with that, you can either:
>
>    - take this opportunity to add the submodule at the target place -
>    only dealing with relocating component.mk (you can take inspiration
>    from my tree : wolfssh
>    <https://github.com/llange/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/tree/experimental-esp-idf-build-workflow/vehicle/OVMS.V3/components/wolfssh>
>    (component.mk and README.md) and wolfssl
>    <https://github.com/llange/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/tree/experimental-esp-idf-build-workflow/vehicle/OVMS.V3/components/wolfssl>
>    (component.mk and README.md and port/ directory that you need to move
>    - careful, in my tree the user_settings.h is already patched, you don't
>    want that for the moment.))
>    - just replace as-is, and I'll do the relocation with a PR.
>    - Or if you want I can also handle the (b) and (c) parts of your
>    proposal myself with a PR
>
> Let me know.
>
> Regards,
>
> Le 26/04/2023 à 04:10, Mark Webb-Johnson a écrit :
>
> I reviewed your config, and see the issue. Quite a lot of parameters to
> set.
>
> Perhaps it is sufficient to have just:
>
>
>    1. One single wireguard tunnel in configuration, with an associated
>    auto setting to automatically start it.
>    2. A wireguiard command to bring up/down other tunnels, manually
>    specified on the command line.
>
>
> That way, if the user really needs more than one tunnel (or custom tunnels
> such as I suggest), he can use command shell scripts, or remote commands to
> bring them up/down.
>
> Regarding wolfssh and other similar external components, I think that they
> can/should be split off and run as submodules sourced from a
> GitHub.com/openvehicles repository. We’ve already done that for mongoose,
> zlib, and libzip. Would you like me to create empty repositories for those,
> and then you can submit the PRs to (a) add the existing code to the new
> repository, (b) remove the code from Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3, and
> (c) add the submodule to Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3? I think
> candidates for this approach include:
>
>
>    1. wolfssh
>    2. wolfssl
>
>
> Regards, Mark
>
> On 25 Apr 2023, at 3:28 PM, Ludovic LANGE <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr>
> <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr> wrote:
>
> Hello Mark,
>
> Thanks for the comments. I'll see how we can manage tunnels from the cli,
> should be doable.
>
> Regarding the PR, here is one PR with only WireGuard support :
> https://github.com/llange/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/1 - it's
> just for review, as it is from my fork to itself.
>
> For the WolfSSH / WolfSSL, I have some pending PRs on master, and I create
> new ones as soon as the previous ones are merged, as to not increase too
> much the burden on the reviewers.
> They are here :
> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+author%3Allange+draft%3Afalse
>
> (wolfssl will be a new one, not created yet, I'm waiting for the feedback
> on the wolfssh one - is a new submodule acceptable or not, or is it better
> to have a subtree, or a copy, ....)
>
> Regards,
>
> Le 25/04/2023 à 02:49, Mark Webb-Johnson a écrit :
>
> Really glad to see this, and thanks for working on it.
>
> I do think it would be useful to have many wireguard circuits configurable.
>
> For my own use case, I would like to be able to bring up a wireguard circuit
> purely from the command line (with no configuration set). This is because I
> am frequently called in to help with setup/configuration/diagnostic issues
> remotely, and having a full VPN would be extremely useful for that. If I
> could just send a single command to start the vpn back to me, then ssh into
> the module (or get can bus data over tcp/ip, etc), it would help
> tremendously.
>
> Regarding the PR, can we split this into (a) for wolfssh/wolfssl as a
> module, and (b) for wireguard support. At the moment, it is quite hard to
> review with both in the same PR.
>
> Regards, Mark.
>
> On 24 Apr 2023, at 5:35 PM, Ludovic LANGE <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr>
> <ll-ovmsdev at lange.nom.fr> wrote:
>
> Dear list,
>
> A few months ago I created
> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/issues/752
> to explore WireGuard VPN support ; which leaded me to add ESP-IDFv5 support
> to OVMS.
>
> Now that this ESP-IDFv5 support is added (in my branch, and it is in the
> progress of getting included in master - with the help and the testing of
> everybody here), I've resumed my exploration of adding support for
> WireGuard VPN to OVMS.
>
> It's now ready for comments, you can now check:
>
>    - a new branch here
>    https://github.com/llange/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/tree/752-wireguard
>    - a DRAFT PR here
>    https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/882
>
> if you want to explore and test this VPN support for OVMS.
>
>
> My own use case for this feature is :
>
>    - Security : I would like my module to be unreachable from the public
>    Internet. This is a first step.
>    - Practicality : I can reach my module with a single IP address / name
>    that is part of my private network. SSH, Web, SCP, ... all work as if my
>    module is local to my servers
>    - Roaming : The idea is to have a single point of contact even if the
>    module changes network, changes IP address, etc...
>
> Part of this feature set is already available with a combination of the
> OVMS Server (v2, v3) and the Hologram.io services, but I wanted to be
> independent of the mobile connexion provider, and also file transfer is
> important for my use case (SCP or other), as I'm often wanting to sync the
> content of the SD card over the network.
>
>
> If you can have a look and give feedback (either here, or on the PR),
> especially on:
>
>    - The documentation : is it enough ? properly organized ? should it be
>    split ? etc...
>    - The command set
>    - The configuration items : what's missing ? is the naming OK ?
>    - Other features (should I introduced events ? metrics ?)
>
> Also if you have any feature request, please share.
>
> Limitations:
>
>    - Currently limited to 1 tunnel, but should work with multiple - it's
>    just a question of arranging the configuration to support multiple instances
>    - Roaming not tested yet (will report)
>    - Compatibility with mobile network not tested yet (will need help on
>    this)
>    - I'm not really happy with the way I set the configuration items. I'd
>    like to "hide" (write-only) the important bits (private key, shared key),
>    but fear that it would clutter the config namespace - especially if I
>    introduce multiple tunnels.
>    Maybe one solution would be to have a rich configuration per tunnel
>    (like a JSON / YAML), which would be a nightmare to edit by hand and would
>    need support in the web interface.
>    - Tunnel always active as soon as the configuration is correct. May be
>    will need to add an enabled/disabled flag to the configuration, and/or an
>    auto-start flag.
>
> Current status:
>
>    - Builds on GitHub actions (if you can to test, pre-compiled firmwares
>    are available here for example:
>    https://github.com/llange/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/actions/runs/4784405668
>    - just download a Zip file (v5.0 or v5.0.1), and flash with a command-line
>    like esptool.py --chip esp32 --port /dev/xxxx --baud 921600
>    write_flash --compress --flash_mode "dio" --flash_freq "40m" --flash_size
>    detect 0x10000 ovms3.bin )
>    - Works on My Machine (tunnel is UP, SSH is working OK, HTTP is
>    working OK, performances look OK. Ping time (ICMP) is comparable with or
>    without tunnel)
>
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Regards,
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing listOvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.comhttp://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing listOvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.comhttp://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing listOvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.comhttp://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing listOvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.comhttp://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20230501/3c9f686e/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the OvmsDev mailing list