|
Thanks for the answer details How to be a sponsor ? ( cost ) of such feature Could you think it can be planned for 5.x ? I think it should be a "future" "standard" in the same way of DNS over SSL Le 19/05/2020 à 16:46, Alex Rousskov a
écrit :
On 18/05/20 10:15 am, David Touzeau wrote:Hi we want to use squid as * * * Secure Proxy * * * using https_port We have tested major browsers and it seems working good. To make it work, we need to deploy the proxy certificate on all browsers to make the secure connection running.I hope that deployment is not necessary -- an HTTPS proxy should be using a certificate issued for its domain name and signed by a well-known CA already trusted by browsers. An HTTPS proxy is not faking anything. If browsers do require CA certificate import in this environment, it is their limitation. On 5/19/20 9:24 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:David, note that requiring browsers to connect to your proxy over encrypted (https) connection, and then decrypting tunnels to real server will lower the clients' securityA proper SslBump implementation for HTTPS proxy will not be "decrypting tunnels to real server". The security of such an implementation will be the same as of SslBump supported today (plus the additional protections offered by securing the browser-proxy communication). Cheers, Alex. _______________________________________________ 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
