On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 05:23:08PM +1100, Kevin Saenz wrote: > > > I'm trialling using smb_auth for access to our squid proxy. > > > > I guess that is good for a small network what happens when the > network grows to a larger size and fixing acls for each user > in squid becomes a pain in the proverbial. But I can see an > up side given that Authentication through smb would be completely > transparent unlike ldap authentication with squid. > > > I'm using transparent proxying with squid, however I've found that this > > won't allow access to permitted users, and I have to point the browser at > > the proxy manually. > > > Didn't someone previously post how much of a bad idea transparent > proxying is in the real world? (By redirecting port 80 to squid's ports)
Transparent Proxying OK Proxy Authentication OK (403? Proxy Authorisation Required) Transparent Proxy Authentication I read was bad, depends whether the smb_auth thing sends Proxy Auth REquired to the browser, or if it sends denied, based on other hacky things in the background. Maybe it's OK with certain browsers. cheers, Woody -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
