Hello Alex,

You got it ! I'm glad to see you are considering it.
This article relates that it will be available in 3.3. As 3.2 has been in beta 
for years, I'm a bit afraid it could take a long time before having the feature 
in a stable release. 
I'm also seeing that this feature relies on Bump-Server-First that will also 
allow bump of intercepted SSL connections. That's another "must have" feature 
:).
Do you think this work will be backported to the STABLE branch as you did for 
dynamic SSL bump on 3.1 branch ?
Are ETA reliable ?

Thank you very much.

Regards.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Rousskov [mailto:[email protected]] 
Envoyé : mardi 3 janvier 2012 20:12
À : Vincent Miszczak
Cc : [email protected]
Objet : Re: Feature request (SSLBump) : generate erroneous certificate if 
original is option

On 01/03/2012 08:19 AM, Vincent Miszczak wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>  
> 
> I’m currently testing Squid 3.1.18 and particularly the dynamic SSL 
> Bump feature.
> 
> This is working fine as expected but I think it could be better :
> 
>  
> 
> Using dynamic SSL Bump, if the remote certificate has issues, you have 
> 2 choices :
> 
> sslproxy_cert_error deny *** or sslproxy_cert_error allow ***
> 
>  
> 
> If you allow those errors, you open a huge security breach.
> 
> If you deny those errors, the page is denied by Squid and you have a 
> regression in a sense that you cannot choose as a user to consider the 
> risk or not, the proxy has decided for you and you loose freedom. In 
> real life scenarios this is really painfull.
> 
> One cool feature would be the possibility (configuration directive) to 
> forward original certificate errors on the dynamically generated 
> certificate. So the user would be prompted about the risk and he could 
> choose to consider it or not.

Hi Vincent,

    Server certificate mimicking is useful for both valid and broken origin 
server certificates. This feature is being implemented now:
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/MimicSslServerCert


Cheers,

Alex.

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 
and is believed to be clean.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Reply via email to