On 10/25/22 1:09 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
It seems as if "transparent" in the context of proxies is as ambiguous as "secure" in the context of VPNs.The former can be "data transparent" and / or "network transparent". The latter can be "privacy secure" and / or "integrity secure". }:-)
Oy vey.For completeness -- I've continued reading -- RFC 1919: Classical verses Transparent IP Proxies § 4 -- Transparent application proxies -- ¶ 3 starts with:
"A transparent application proxy is often described as a system that appears like a packet filter to clients, and like a classical proxy to servers."
So as I read it, RFC 1919 § 4 ¶ 3 supports "network transparency". Then it continues with:"Apart from this important concept, transparent and classical proxies can do similar access control checks and can offer an equivalent level of security/robustness/performance, at least as far as the proxy itself is concerned."
Which reads as if /network/ transparent proxies can be /data/ non-transparent.
Nomenclature and consistent definitions can be hard and can easily sideline discussions.
-- Grant. . . . unix || die
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
_______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
