[squid-users] persistent connections not being utilized with Chrome

Brian J. Murrell brian at interlinx.bc.ca
Mon Jan 15 21:12:23 UTC 2018

On Mon, 2018-01-15 at 13:48 -0700, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> That statement does not compute in the current context: A transparent
> proxy has many disadvantages over a forward/explicit proxy,

Sure.  But it has advantages also.

> but both
> transparent and forward/explicit proxies have approximately the same
> support for HTTPS. In other words, if you find a forward/explicit
> proxy
> useful for HTTPS, then a transparent proxy can be used similarly.

And can be done *WITHOUT* doing a MitM attack on my users?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/attachments/20180115/ff7565f1/attachment.sig>

More information about the squid-users mailing list