This is a discussion on Re: [stunnel-users] stunnel automatically listening to extra within the Stunnel Users forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; Alan, On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Alan Pinstein wrote: [...] > Yes. RHEL5. > > > The following is an educated ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
Alan,
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Alan Pinstein wrote: [...] > Yes. RHEL5. > > > The following is an educated guess: > > > > Open connections are open file descriptors, and fork()/exec() do not > > close open file descriptors. Thus, stunnel is inheriting the open > > connection. And, since it knows nothing about it, it does not close it > > or anything like that. So it's not that it activelly listens on it, > > but only that it does not bother to stop. You might check this theory > > by trying to connect to the port *after* apache is shut down. If I'm > > right you should get no answer at all. > > I don't know a lot about sockets programming, but I am not sure this > makes sense... I don't WANT stunnel to stop listening to those ports; > rather it shouldn't ever start. stunnel has a config file, so I'd > expect it to only listen to the ports it was told to listen to, which > is 4449. > > I run lots of child processes from php and none of them end up > listening to port 80/443 once the server exits. > > Although, now that I think about it, I am not sure I daemonize any > processes from a php script... > > But still I think that stunnel is actively listening on these ports. > Forked processed just don't inherit sockets from parents AFAIK.... Not so. > > So, the solution is to have the file descriptors close when exec'ing > > stunnel. PHP or apache might have some option somewhere to do that > > (look for "close on exec" or something similarly named), but if not, > > you might have to write some sort of wrapper to do it. It's a messy > > thing, because AFAIK there's no clean way to do it short of > > > > for (i = 0; i < [some-hopefuly-large-enough-value]; i++) > > close(i); [...] I've seen this problem discussed in other forums. It recently (re)surfaced in the Exim world. See, for example, the thread which starts at http://lists.exim.org/lurker/message...1f8896.en.html and eventually leads to the rather more informative http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=366124 and http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=38915 The consensus seems to be that the problem lies with mod_php or maybe even Apache (though agreement is far from universal) HTH, Richard _______________________________________________ stunnel-users mailing list stunnel-users@mirt.net http://stunnel.mirt.net/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|