On 14/04/18 10:03, Alex Crow wrote:
>
>> Unless the protocol design changes to expose full URLs and/or MIME types,
>> nothing will replace Squid Bumping.
>>
>> That being said, we are headed to the vortex by 2018.05.01. Let's drown
>> together, while we yell and curse at Google!
>>
>> MK
>>
>>
>>
On 04/13/2018 02:41 PM, MK2018 wrote:
> Alex Rousskov wrote
>> Believe it or not, there are still many Squid use cases where bumping is
>> unnecessary. This includes, but is not limited to, HTTPS proxying cases
>> with peek/splice/terminate rules and environments where Squid possesses
>> the certi
MK2018 wrote
> Alex Crow-2 wrote
>>> Unless the protocol design changes to expose full URLs and/or MIME
>>> types,
>>> nothing will replace Squid Bumping.
>>>
>>> That being said, we are headed to the vortex by 2018.05.01. Let's drown
>>> together, while we yell and curse at Google!
>>>
>>> MK
>>>
Alex Crow-2 wrote
>> Unless the protocol design changes to expose full URLs and/or MIME types,
>> nothing will replace Squid Bumping.
>>
>> That being said, we are headed to the vortex by 2018.05.01. Let's drown
>> together, while we yell and curse at Google!
>>
>> MK
>>
>>
>>
>
> Erm, can someone
Unless the protocol design changes to expose full URLs and/or MIME types,
nothing will replace Squid Bumping.
That being said, we are headed to the vortex by 2018.05.01. Let's drown
together, while we yell and curse at Google!
MK
Erm, can someone elucidate the issue here? Can't see anythi
Hello :)
Alex Rousskov wrote
> Believe it or not, there are still many Squid use cases where bumping is
> unnecessary. This includes, but is not limited to, HTTPS proxying cases
> with peek/splice/terminate rules and environments where Squid possesses
> the certificate issued by CAs trusted by c
Yuri Voinov wrote:
Hope at this. It is difficult to make long-term plans if the software
has to die soon. :)
---
..And if SW doesn't die "soon", but only a little later? I.e. with
google's AI designing new encryption algorithms today (nothing
said about quality), how long before they can ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
02.11.2016 2:58, Alex Rousskov пишет:
> On 11/01/2016 02:47 PM, Yuri Voinov wrote:
>
>> if the SSL bump will be impossible to do -
>> whether it should be understood that in such a situation you close the
>> project Squid as unnecessary? :) Serio
On 11/01/2016 02:47 PM, Yuri Voinov wrote:
> if the SSL bump will be impossible to do -
> whether it should be understood that in such a situation you close the
> project Squid as unnecessary? :) Seriously, why does it then need to be
> in a world without HTTP?
Believe it or not, there are still
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
02.11.2016 2:03, Alex Rousskov пишет:
> On 10/31/2016 04:13 PM, L. A. Walsh wrote:
>> Google is pushing this for all websites by October 2017
>
> Just Extended Validation (EV) sites, to be exact AFAICT. All other sites
> will be forced into the n
On 10/31/2016 04:13 PM, L. A. Walsh wrote:
> Google is pushing this for all websites by October 2017
Just Extended Validation (EV) sites, to be exact AFAICT. All other sites
will be forced into the new scheme sometime later. Naturally, this may
result in requests to downgrade mimicked server certi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Google and so is not too conducive to caching the end user. One problem
anymore - one less, what's the difference? When we begin to beat - start
to cry. In general, the year in IT - eternity. During this time,
everything can happen. So relax, cousi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
When the future comes - then we will worry. What wonder, then?
October 2017 is not tomorrow.
01.11.2016 4:13, L. A. Walsh пишет:
> Google is pushing this for all websites by October 2017
>
> One issue to be "caught" are subordinated CA certs tha
13 matches
Mail list logo
