Error code: ssl_error_renegotiation_not_allowed

[Broosha]

Subject: Error code: ssl_error_renegotiation_not_allowed

Hi Folks,

We will fix the https connectin on virtual host on coming firmware version.

Dear Alex,

I have come to the point i need this update. Our webshop is in need of a certificated SSL and as you will understand i'm not in control of my client's browsers.
Any local workarround therefore is unwanted and will not solve the problems of the outdated version the QNAP uses.

Could you please be so helpfull and give me the exact date of the firmware release in wich the SSL version will be updated? Or is there any detailed helpfile available for the QNAP TS-459 PROII so i can update / install the latest version myself?

You mentioned / promissed the issue would be resolved in the next firmware. I hope the promisse is not empty since we passed more then 6 month's since then and firmware updates.
I have full confidence QNAP takes it's customers very serious and also supports the higher needs of the more "serious" users of these fine products.

Regards,

El Broosha

[Crush]

Subject: Error code: ssl_error_renegotiation_not_allowed
...
I have full confidence QNAP takes it's customers very serious and also supports the higher needs of the more "serious" users of these fine products.


El Broosha

LOL!

[AlexKe]

Hi Folks,

Sorry for not follow up the process. The project must be postponed by some reasons. We will review the Firefox SSL connection on virtual host issue and re-schedule it.

[Broosha]

Thank you very much for your prompt reply.
I however don't see the reason to review the Firefox SSL connection again since obviously in june the decision allready was made to upgrade. But of course thats only my opinion and if the QNAP workflow demands to re-review the issue again i'm more then willing to have (again) patience as long as the outcome stays the same: upgrade.

But i'm sure you do the upmost best you can and in your efforts to do so we will be, in the end, be all very happy again.

regards,

El-Broosha

[schumaku]

Sorry for not follow up the process. The project must be postponed by some reasons.

Updating OpenSSL should not be rocket science. Any junior RD can handle this in a day for ARM, 32bit and 64bit x86. It's an URGENT security issue, pain in the back for all NAS owners operating an SSL Web server that must be addessed ASAP.

[River Trent]

Sorry for not follow up the process. The project must be postponed by some reasons.

Updating OpenSSL should not be rocket science. Any junior RD can handle this in a day for ARM, 32bit and 64bit x86. It's an URGENT security issue, pain in the back for all NAS owners operating an SSL Web server that must be addessed ASAP.

I second this!

This is very important and needs doing now!

[forkless]

I recently acquired an SSL cert that I was planning to use, to my dismay I had to discover that there is no ubiquity for Firefox! (not to mention the gaping security hole). That's 20% of the browser market!

This together with the (and sorry for pushing this aswell) unsupported out of date PHP version is unacceptable!

I see this (open)SSL issue has been lingering as well, why QNAP!?



ps. I don't think I've ever written a four sentence post on this board that had exclamation marks on all four sentences... I'm really starting to become an unhappy camper (and that's being polite).

[schumaku]

The project must be postponed by some reasons. We will review the Firefox SSL connection on virtual host issue and re-schedule it.

Almost two months later: This is simply no longer acceptable. The issue is well knwon long enough. Fix it NOW!

[forkless]

Hello QNAP what is going on with this issue?

I expect any normal Apache implementation to at least work with basic functions such as SSL for vhosts. This is not a pretty please functionality, it's a MUST have!

[River Trent]

Hello QNAP what is going on with this issue?

I expect any normal Apache implementation to at least work with basic functions such as SSL for vhosts. This is not a pretty please functionality, it's a MUST have!

+1

[forkless]

*bump

[forkless]

*bump

Not getting any happier with the non-communication.

[schumaku]

Its as unprofessional like not making high-risk SAMBA vulnerabilities available within a few days.

[forkless]

Ah well, at least that got hotfixed now.

...and yes QNAP shameless bump!

[forkless]

Hello QNAP,

I would like to use $180 worth of SSL certificates that are now collecting dust...