cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
22350
Views
20
Helpful
57
Replies

SSL Certificate errors on websites since using Cisco RV130 router

frederick111
Level 1
Level 1

Dear reader,

 
The problem we are having is very random, but various colleagues of mine are getting a NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID in Chrome when trying to access their gmail or calendar from Google. Now I know what you might think, this must be a browser problem, but in most cases, switching to another browser simply results in the same problem, just a different formulation of the problem (since hey, it's another browser).
 
Now here comes the weird part, this all started SINCE we placed the Cisco RV130 router in our network. Before that our ISP issued Modem was in Modem/Router mode (now it's been set to Bridge mode by the ISP, I cannot set this myself!) and the aforementioned router was placed in between our first switch (A Netgear GS748T) and the modem.
 
Various things that I have checked, but first and foremost lets handle the occurrence. The problem only happens sometimes, say a person comes into the office, starts his or her computer, gmail works fine. Then after a few hours they get this error, and after refreshing for like 5 minutes the problem disappears and they can check their Gmail again. Others have this when accessing their calendar but not when opening their gmail. So to sum this all up, it's completely random. So far I am the only one who's experienced it with another website (as in, other than gmail or the gmail calendar) and that was when I tried to access Facebook.com, but this has only been once so far, and honestly I don't care at all if this would ever happen again since the other two websites are way more important.
 
Computers are running Kaspersky Internet Security, and although the problem only started recently I have tried disabling it when somebody was experiencing the problem but this didn't result in being able to access the aforementioned pages.
 
Another thing I have checked which seemed to pop up quite often (but given this error message I think it doesn't matter) is the system time on computers. Which I have made sure it was synced and therefore correct. 
 
Also, just now I was able to find out this. When I had the problem on a colleague's computer I did a ping to both www.google.com and www.apple.com (given the subject of the error) and the results were this:
 
www.google.com:
 
Pinging www.google.com [95.100.141.15] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=59


Ping statistics for 95.100.141.15:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 9ms, Maximum = 11ms, Average = 10ms
 
&
 
www.apple.com:
 
Pinging e3191.dscc.akamaiedge.net [95.100.141.15] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=59
Reply from 95.100.141.15: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59


Ping statistics for 95.100.141.15:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 9ms, Maximum = 16ms, Average = 12ms
 
I don't think it can be correct that both resolve to the same IP address even though I'm pinging to two different webpages. Am I transitioning into a rounting / switching / dns problem here or is this still a Chrome problem? Any help would be appreciated because I'm quite at loss!
 
Best regards,
 
Fred
 
P.s. I have added two images of the resulting errors from Chrome.
 
 
 
 
 
[edit]
Forgot to mention that I have started a similar discussion on the Google Chrome forums, but other than flushing my dns in Windows and clearing my host cache in chrome I haven't gotten any results yet. And that only seems to solve the problem temporarily.
57 Replies 57

For routing basics these Cisco SMB products are fine once they settle, including the stability of their more basic VPN functionality.  These modern wifi-integrated routers seem badly done and fairly pointless considering the older RV220W product which had selectable dual band wifi.

I evaluated a Synology RT1900ac for its tempting mix of possible SMB-class security support and basic routing features with decent wifi, but its wifi crashed after a few days.  Plus its most recent firmware (6447u1) crashes Shaw cable modems on boot (likely due to some strange MAC swapping type behavior on the WAN port as these DPC3825 modems need to be rebooted if the connected MAC changes).  These devices will probably be a significant threat to Cisco's midrange RV routers once their firmware stabilizes, as they support dual WAN and USB dongles etc.

One client who didn't need its VPN functions got fed up with the RV130W and swapped a consumer class Linksys AC2600 product in place of it (on their own) to resolve the RV130s essentially unusable state when its wifi is used to any substantial degree.  I hate the security hole that represents for security flaw support of its firewall etc, but this type of sloppy support from Cisco burns their name and fuels dice-rolling behavior like this for entry SMB clients who begin to see the products as more of a cost than a benefit.

Not applicable

RV-130W

No luck with FW 1.0.3.28... and now going EOL

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/routers/small-business-rv-series-routers/eos-eol-notice-c51-739127.html

Looks like we will get firmware updates until the end of August next year now that its EOL is specified.

I still don't find the routing works reliably unless bandwidth management is enabled, which limits its performance on high speed WAN connections as it appears to disable its hardware NAT which caps WAN-LAN throughput.  The latest firmware seemed to vastly improve the stability of the RV130W's wifi portion.  Cross our fingers?

Frank:

 

I am having a hard time finding a small business router that "works" (I have tried Linksys and Cisco labeled routers without luck).  Could you please tell me what manufacturer and model router is working for you?  Thank you!

This solution is working, I recommend to use it. I could not enter the office365, after checking the box and turning off the checkbox everything worked. I have Cisco RV140

kibatronic
Level 1
Level 1

I am having the exact same problem with my RV130 with the 1.0.1.3 firmware. Opening 10 pages in Chrome web-browser on any of my 3 different computers will leave at least one of the pages consoles full of 404 (Not found), 400 (Bad request) and SSL errors.

If I replace the Cisco router for a Netgear R6200 none of these errors appear.

I have tried restoring the unit to factory defaults but the problem persists. The user interface is also EXTREMLY sluggish. It can take minutes before it finally loads/reacts to user input.

Hello, do you have installed Kaspersky on these computers too ?

It is very disappointing to see when use a home router we got less trouble than a small business one for me. And much more to see no one from Cisco answered us about this...

On two of the computers I have Windows 8.1 with only the built in Windows Defender active. On the third computer I have Xubuntu Linux 15.04 installed without any antivirus software.

This is definetly a issue with the router and not related to a configuration error in the computers. 

Just for fun I loaded a Android image to a USB and booted it. The same problem there too.

If I let the router 'cool-down', ie no traffic for a minute, it works, but only for singel page-views. If I start pushing several pageloads through it, it starts to act weird. I will propably RMA this thing...

I finally got my RMA approved and got the RV130 credited. Not really sure what router to get next. Since the RV130 seems to have issues I am quite sure I will stay clear of those.

That's surprisingly good news considering Cisco has been unwilling to admit that there is anything wrong with the RV130.  What grounds did you use for the RMA that Cisco accepted for the return?  I have two clients whose RV130's I would like to return and replace.

 

The RV180 never had this problem, so perhaps you can find one of those for your use.  Alternatively, the RV320 seems to be problem free, based upon the feedback on this thread, though people have noted that it might be a few more dollars.  Good luck!!

The grounds for the RMA that I gave was that the RV130 was incapable of routing http-traffic. Since it was advertised as a router it must be defective.

I have just installed a RV180 and so far it does not seem to suffer from the same issue. I will report back if any problems arise.

I am having exactly the same problem at the two client sites at which we installed the RV130.  These are completely vanilla installations.  We had previously been installing RV180's and had no issue along these lines.  As far as I am concerned, the issue is purely within the firmware of the RV130, but there is no update yet available from Cisco for this model...

 

Dear People,

 

Previous week I've had a very very lengthy chat with a Cisco representative. Although he was very helpful in general he, and a Cisco higher-up concluded that the problem was not in the RV130. Given my findings (especially with the ping results) I still find this very hard to believe, but all in all I've considered RMA'ing my RV130 and getting another device instead, probably a RV320, but I'm not entirely set on this yet, especially since I'm afraid of getting the same problem again with the Cisco RV series.

Waiting for a firmware update will be like waiting for hell to freeze over considering Cisco 'determined' that the problem is on the client computer side and not in the router. If you cannot live with this problem just like me I suggest changing devices one way or another.

That's really bad news... There's no doubt that the problem come with the RV130.

We have sold and installed dozens of cisco series RV whithout any problem.

We have sold 2 RV130 and both have the same problem : HTTPS certificate errors...

frederick111
Level 1
Level 1

@Everyone:

 

I want to include by now that we've switched from the RV130 to the RV320. Although a slightly more expensive model we've been on this router for over a week now and all in all I'm really glad that I've switched.

First of all I tried setting up a PPTP Server on the RV130, getting authentication to work however never succeeded, on the RV320 I enabled the server, added several users and I was done.

On the RV130 we often had problems with our Wireless AP's having bad internet connections. The WiFi would be there but the internet connection would drop, since we had a combination of wired and wireless users at the time I would always ask a person on the Wired connection if he was still connected, but usually they simply dropped out as well.

Lastly, the weird SSL connection problems. Since using this router the SSL problem hasn't occurred even once. I still have no clue whatsoever how this is possible, but given the fact that switching routers has solved this I think we can conclude this problem is definitely RV130 related.

So to conclude, even though the RV320 is slightly more expensive and a bit of an older model, the advantages outweigh the price big-time. So I suggest for everyone on the fence about changing routers.... go to the RV320. (Other models might apply obviously, but for us the RV130 was a first option because we needed several things, the RV320 does all those and slightly more.)

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: