Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
Is there anyone here running ScreenConnect with Let's Encrypt for https? (I will leave it on the Windows machine if I have to; moving to Linux was recommended because "it is easier.")
I am sure someone does, but no. You will not find people doing it because it uses it's own self contained piece of shit based on IIS.
So stop complaining that shit doesn't work and figure out WTF you are doing wrong. I know for a fact that my guide for setting up Nginx works fine. I've done it a couple of times this year already for new setups.
-
Thank you all for your help.
I am obviously out of my league and do not belong here.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
Yes, well I can't get nginx working regardless of why, who, or what is involved. I do not understand it and cannot seem to learn it. Which is why I am pleading for help with an alternative. Like Let's Encrypt.
Lets Encrypt is not an alternative. Nginx is what you use to get Lets Encrypt. LE is your certification authority. Nginx is the service that utilizes that certificate.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
Telling me "it's just standard Nginx" makes me feel like more of a fool because I can't get "just standard nginx" working.
It should not make you feel like a fool, I'm trying to explain how to find the right resources. It was getting much harder for you because you were looking for the answer in the wrong place. The SSL process is handled by Nginx, not ScreenConnect, so the issue must be resolved in Nginx and searching for SC resources will lead you to believing that it is far harder than it is.
If Nginx is the issue, then ask for help with that and we will help. That's where we've been trying to get to on the thread, so that you'd know where to look for for the solution. Windows, Linux... they don't matter because the LE cert isn't on the SC server, which the piece that has Windows or Linux options.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
My set up is a Fedora 30 machine that I want to get Let's Encrypt working for https on my ScreenConnect server.
This is the problem. That's not where LE goes. Hence why this seems so hard. You can't just state that you want it there and have it happen. You need something that can handle LE for you. None of us could make it do what you are trying to do either.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
Is there anyone here running ScreenConnect with Let's Encrypt for https?
Seems unlikely as this would be less safe, and way more work than doing it with Nginx. I know you are feeling frustrated with Nginx, but because you are doing something "harder" than the thing you are frustrated by, you are making yourself way more frustrated than you should be. Running your own SC server is a pain in the butt under regular conditions. We do this for other companies specifically because it is such a pain that MSPs regularly hire this out. It's several moving parts, many of which are undocumented (officially) and a bit complex and don't relate to one another.
If Nginx is proving to be too much to tackle, then there is no simpler alternative. That's the easiest approach. That's not a criticism, it's just "if the easiest option is too hard, harder options don't get easier." I understand that you don't want to keep pushing on Nginx, but in doing so, you are guaranteeing that you are going to spin your wheels and get frustrated because that's the only truly viable approach here.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
I just need https functioning on my on-premises ScreenConnect server.
Then listen to the advice. There is one and just one way to get this reasonably working.... Nginx. Every time you mention LE on SC, or not wanting to use Nginx what you are actually saying is "I am going to intentionally making this unreasonably hard just because I want to." There is no magic "make it work" button. You are acting like we are pushing an agenda to promote a product, but we are not. We are all telling you the same, unified message: that there is one surmountable means of doing this and it is by using Nginx. Alternatives exist, but they are much harder.
All attempted to circumvent doing this the "known way" are guaranteed to make this way harder than necessary. So, if your statement is true, you should be focused on Nginx and nothing else. Your questions and attempts have to be there, and only there.
So to us, we are getting conflicting messages. You can't have it both ways "just getting it working" and "don't want to use Nginx". You have to choose one.
-
@Scott said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
I have tried (and have had people here try) to setup nginx but it never works and it just leads to sobbing.
This is something you can hire out really easily. People like @JaredBusch do this for people all of the time. It's the kind of thing you can just pay someone to do once and it's done for you. Having a reverse proxy up and running is quick for someone who knows the system and then you have a system that really maintains itself, just set it for automatic updates.
No one is claiming that Nginx is easy. Just have someone take care of this one little piece for you.
-
To ask has anyone here wrote a guide on how to setup nginx and SC from the ground up?
I think the biggest problem is the lack of concise documentation for nginx. So why not have someone who's familiar with the process write a how-to?
-
@DustinB3403 said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
To ask has anyone here wrote a guide on how to setup nginx and SC from the ground up?
I think Jared has, but both pieces are definitely documented in the community. What's been followed or tried hasn't been mentioned. That makes it really hard because there doesn't seem to be any questions asked until frustration set it and the documented process was abandoned. So by the time the community tried to help, it was already too late.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Has anyone got a guide to installing ScreenConnect on Fedora 30 with Let's Encrypt?:
So why not have someone who's familiar with the process write a how-to?
There you go.
-
@Scott I went through all of your questions historically and never once have you asked for help with Nginx in this context, or any other. I'm confused as to how we got to the point of abandoning the stock approach to start down a path that was guaranteed to lead to despair, when you didn't even ask for casual community assistance. Had you asked, any number of us could have just posted our "just works" configuration files; which we just did.
I'm not trying to be overly harsh, but it feels like you sabotaged this process from the beginning. You didn't ask the community for guidance on the best approach to take, nor ask how those of us have it working got it working, you didn't ask for help on how to make that process work, and only asked for help once you had decided you wouldn't accept help and "demanded" that only approaches that are extra hard and/or impossible would be considered. You also claimed that getting this working on Windows was easier than Linux, which can only be stated if you at least got it fully working on Windows, but you implied that you could not get it working at all.
So this feels like you posted to disparage the Linux and/or Nginx approaches, but didn't even really try with any earnest. Not even the most casual first step of asking how others had done it. If you were really trying to make this work, why didn't you ask for advice and help? This would have been a really easy thing to have helped with, had you wanted us to find a solution for you. And you glommed really quickly onto the discussion on Linux or Windows, which was unrelated to your issue and affected you not at all, as if it was core to your problem and some kind of frustration - which makes it doubly feel like you were setting us up to look unhelpful, when you never really gave us the slightest option to be of assistance.
