Matthew Trey wrote: > that is true, once squidguard is up and running with this config it > will simply pass nothing, with no notice that anything was blocked.
That statement is incorrect. Without a redirect statement, squidGuard will PASS EVERYTHING, NOTHING WILL BE BLOCKED. squidGuard cannot "block". squidGuard can only "redirect". squidGuard cannot "block". squidGuard can only "redirect". squidGuard cannot "block". squidGuard can only "redirect". The interface between squid and squidGuard is very limited. Squid passes the information to squidGuard and waits for an answer from squidGuard. squidGuard's response to squid is one of two things: a blank line (approved), or a new url. Those are the only two choices. Without a redirect statement squidGuard ALWAYS returns a blank line. > Provided we figure out the lack of rule matching, Everything will be approved in the absence of redirect statements. Rick P.S. squidGuard cannot "block". squidGuard can only "redirect". > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Matthew Trey > Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 6:05 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Not blocking > > > > > Rick Matthews wrote: > > > squidGuard won't redirect without a redirect statement. > > Yup. > > that is true, once squidguard is up and running with this config it will > simply > pass nothing, with no notice that anything was blocked. Provided we figure > out the > lack of rule matching, I do suggest adding a redirect rule, directly below > the pass > rule pointing to either a simple html file or cgi script, or really anything > you want. > > this will let the user know the content was blocked rather than getting no > info at all. > > >
