Hi Amos, Thanks for your reply . "To cache encryption protected content you must first remove the encryption. That destroys the "anonymous" part completely." Could you please provide little more details about this line about it destroys the anonymous while we decrypt the encryption and enable caching for https? https caching for anonymous proxy is not recommended? On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 8:42 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21/12/17 02:41, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >>> >>> On 21/12/17 01:23, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >>>> >>>> and I think you should read the last paragraph as: >>>> >>>> "caching often will not happen, since most of web developers don't know >>>> hot >>>> so use and benefit of it thus they try to disable caching globally" >> >> >> On 21.12.17 02:20, Amos Jeffries wrote: >>> >>> That is nothing special for HTTPS, it happens worse in regular HTTP. >> >> >> do you want to say that breaking into https can cause http caching more >> efficient? >> do you have any evidence of that? >> > > No, I am saying that the problem you pointed at is a _larger_ problem in > http:// because those dev are having to actively prevent caching. Many are > also under the false impression that https:// goes end-to-end and caching > does not happen there other than Browser cache. So those who develop sites > with HTTPS in mind do not go to quite such extremes to block proxies > caching. > > HTTPS has _other_ problems that impact on caching efficiency. > > Amos > > _______________________________________________ > squid-users mailing list > squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
