From: Simon McVittie Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 20:12:43 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/commitdiff_plain/bb46e3b3659d873ae552683833c998acd2e275f1?hp=3d1de970f11c3806b9c80781fab0825f58467a03 Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' --- diff --git a/doc/plugins/openid/troubleshooting.mdwn b/doc/plugins/openid/troubleshooting.mdwn index c59f7346a..0de6fab51 100644 --- a/doc/plugins/openid/troubleshooting.mdwn +++ b/doc/plugins/openid/troubleshooting.mdwn @@ -56,6 +56,37 @@ unlikely-to-be-blacklisted value is; if there is one, it's probably the next one all the rude bots will be using anyway, and some goofy provider like mine will blacklist it. +> If your shared hosting provider is going to randomly break functionality, +> I would suggest "voting with your wallet" and taking your business to +> one that does not. +> +> In principle we could set the default UA (if `$config{useragent}` is +> unspecified) to `IkiWiki/3.20140915`, or `IkiWiki/3.20140915 libwww-perl/6.03` +> (which would be the "most correct" option AIUI), or some such. +> That might work, or might get randomly blacklisted too, depending on the +> whims of shared hosting providers. If you can't trust your provider to +> behave helpfully then there isn't much we can do about it. +> +> Blocking requests according to UA seems fundamentally flawed, since +> I'm fairly sure no hosting provider can afford to blacklist UAs that +> claim to be, for instance, Firefox or Chrome. I wouldn't want +> to patch IkiWiki to claim to be an interactive browser by default, +> but malicious script authors will have no such qualms, so I would +> argue that your provider's strategy is already doomed... --[[smcv]] + +>> I agree, and I'll ask them to fix it (and probably refer them to this page). +>> One reason they still have my business is that their customer service has +>> been notably good; I always get a response from a human on the first try, +>> and on the first or second try from a human who understands what I'm saying +>> and is able to fix it. With a few exceptions over the years. I've dealt with organizations not like that.... +>> +>> But I included the note here because I'm sure if _they're_ doing it, there's +>> probably some nonzero number of other hosting providers where it's also +>> happening, so a person setting up OpenID and being baffled by this failure +>> needs to know to check for it. Also, while the world of user-agent strings +>> can't have anything but relatively luckier and unluckier choices, maybe +>> `libwww/perl` is an especially unlucky one? + ## Error: OpenID failure: naive_verify_failed_network: Could not contact ID provider to verify response. Again, this could have various causes. It was helpful to bump the debug level @@ -103,6 +134,10 @@ Unfortunately, there isn't a release in CPAN yet that includes those two commits, but they are only a few lines to edit into your own locally-installed module. +> To be clear, these are patches to [[!cpan LWPx::ParanoidAgent]]. +> Debian's `liblwpx-paranoidagent-perl (>= 1.10-3)` appears to +> have those two patches. --[[smcv]] + ## Still naive_verify_failed_network, new improved reason 500 Can't connect to indieauth.com:443 (SSL connect attempt failed @@ -136,6 +171,19 @@ not be used by `IO::Socket::SSL` unless it is Then a recent `Net::SSLeay` perl module needs to be built and linked against it. +> I would tend to be somewhat concerned about the update status and security +> of a shared hosting platform that is still on an OpenSSL major version from +> pre-2010 - it might be fine, because it might be RHEL or some similarly +> change-averse distribution backporting security fixes to ye olde branch, +> but equally it might be as bad as it seems at first glance. +> "Let the buyer beware", I think... --[[smcv]] + +>> As far as I can tell, this particular provider _is_ on Red Hat (EL 5). +>> I can't conclusively tell because I'm in what appears to be a CloudLinux container when I'm in, +>> and certain parts of the environment (like `rpm`) I can't see. But everything +>> I _can_ see is like several RHEL5 boxen I know and love. + + ### Local OpenSSL installation will need certs to trust Bear in mind that the OpenSSL distribution doesn't come with a collection @@ -164,6 +212,9 @@ That was fixed in `LWPx::ParanoidAgent` with which needs to be backported by hand if it hasn't made it into a CPAN release yet. +> Also in Debian's `liblwpx-paranoidagent-perl (>= 1.10-3)`, for the record. +> --[[smcv]] + Only that still doesn't end the story, because that hand didn't know what [this hand](https://github.com/noxxi/p5-io-socket-ssl/commit/4f83a3cd85458bd2141f0a9f22f787174d51d587#diff-1) was doing. What good is passing the name in @@ -187,6 +238,11 @@ server name for SNI: ... not submitted upstream yet, so needs to be applied by hand. +> I've [reported this to Debian](https://bugs.debian.org/761635) +> (which is where ikiwiki.info's supporting packages come from). +> Please report it upstream too, if the Debian maintainer doesn't +> get there first. --[[smcv]] + # Success!! And with that, ladies and gents, I got my first successful OpenID login!