Hello,
I have installed the latest beta (16) on a box that does not have a
firewall. I have confirmed that with a prompt iam able to resolve
domain names.. but for some reason squid complaints it cant. Is there
any option i need to edit so that it uses either 127.0.0.1 to resolve
or any other publ
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Alex Rousskov
wrote:
> I believe the basic SSL Bump feature in Squid v3.1 is relatively well
> tested. It has been around for a while. I am not aware of any open bugs
> (but have not checked recently). Its usability is rather limited because
> of the frequent certi
Greetings,
I want to give a show to the SSL Bump feature that we have long
awaited on 3.1 . Id like to know how advanced/tested this feature is
in currently to know if there is a chance I can begin using it on
production environment.
Thanks.
Dimitri
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Richard Bejtlich wrote:
>
> [1] http://taosecurity.blogspot.com/2006/09/port-independent-protocol.html
> [2] http://bro-ids.org/wiki/index.php/DynamicProtocolDetection
>
Interesting enough the L7-filter and IPP2P projects seem to be dead.
http://bro-ids.org/wi
I apologize for the repeated email... got sent before time.
To finish on the example:
LanUser1 makes an http request -> The HTTP request is processed on a
BOX that acts as a gateway --> That same box has squid installed and
filters the http request (Normal ACLs) --> Depending on the private IP
of
Hello all,
This is a question combining squid with firewall rule manipulation
(both need to get along well...).
I have a LAN and a GATEWAY BOX that serves as a NAT for all of the
users behind the LAN.
MY goal is to make the box filter all http requests and once they are
clean route the traffic t
Hello all,
This is a question combining squid with firewall rule manipulation
(both need to get along well...).
I have a LAN and a GATEWAY BOX that serves as a NAT for all of the
users behind the LAN.
MY goal is to make the box filter all http requests and once they are
clean route the traffic t
?
Thank you.
Dimitri
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Alex Rousskov
wrote:
> On 01/13/2010 10:30 AM, Dimitri Syuoul wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Ive been reading over this new feature. It is unclear to me if this
>> can be used for transparently proxying SSL (by this I mean n
ith
> transparent caching. If it is, I would love to make use of it as well.
>
> Nick
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dimitri Syuoul [mailto:dsyu...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sat 1/16/2010 5:30 PM
> To: squid-users
> Subject: [squid-users] Re: SSBump.. could it
Hello,
I submitted the response below but for some reason nobody appears to
have commented on this. Is this feature still in beta mode that there
isnt much doc about it?
Thank you
Dimitri
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Dimitri Syuoul wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Ive been reading over
Hello,
Ive been reading over this new feature. It is unclear to me if this
can be used for transparently proxying SSL (by this I mean not
configuring any proxy in the computers of the clients.. it is ok if
clients get cert warnings).
Thank you.
Dimitri
Hi there,
In response to this policy change submitted by Amos for Squid 3.0
http://www.nabble.com/half_closed_clients-Policy-Change-td19578737.html
Iam a squid-2.7.STABLE6 , and iam very curious as to why the twist ?
Ive been noticing that sometimes when the users surf the internet the
browser o
Hello,
I have a squid installation on my LAN, it forwards all requests to the
remote cache_peer. My question is... would there be a way for me to
specify to the cache_peer that an acl user should use a specific
tcp_outgoing_address that is bound to that remote box? Id like to be
able to manage tha
13 matches
Mail list logo
