On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 00:07 +0200, Tsantilas Christos wrote:
> Moreover we must not be absolutely sure that the icap servers will
> always be located at the same site as the proxy. Maybe in the future
> some icap-services will be public available for use by everyone..
That future is pretty mu
Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 16:26 +0100, Kinkie wrote:
>
>> In this regard I see the ICAP server not to be any different from a
>> proxy server, of which it is simply an extension.
>
> Whether the trust boundary includes both the proxy and the ICAP server
> depends on the setup.
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 16:26 +0100, Kinkie wrote:
> In this regard I see the ICAP server not to be any different from a
> proxy server, of which it is simply an extension.
Whether the trust boundary includes both the proxy and the ICAP server
depends on the setup. Being an "extension" is not alway
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 18:04 +0100, Stefan Bischof wrote:
> > I am sure we will eventually see compromised or otherwise unfriendly
> > ICAP servers that do nasty things. Such servers would love to do
> nasty
> > things "on behalf" of a client, using client identity if possible.
> Thus,
> > I have a
