On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: > On 03.04.2012 10:36, Mike Belshe wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Adrien W. de Croy wrote: >> >> >>> ------ Original Message ------ >>> From: "Roberto Peon" >>> >>> I don't trust proxies... hopefully that is apparent, but I'm asking for >>> explicit support for them and attempting to deny support for non explicit >>> proxies. >>> >>> I don't have a problem with proxy usage moving to explicit only. We've >>> been trying to get customers to move in that direction for years. >>> >>> Customers do like using interception though. Educating them costs money. >>> Not providing the feature would cost us sales, until we could get >>> commitment from every other vendor to deprecate the feature. >>> >>> if 2.0 can fix this by providing a path forward which doesn't allow it, >>> then everyone will be in the same boat, which is fine with me. >>> >>> >> If we got SSL interception to work with trusted proxies, it would be a >> huge >> feature to a lot of corporate sites. Not having to roll out SSL MITM is >> really valuable to them. >> >> I'm 100% sure that Chrome & Firefox would get behind a solution which >> enforced SSL more often and required browsers to support more features >> with >> trusted SSL to proxies. >> > > The 8+ years we have had bugs open against Firefox explaining the > use-cases, what is needed and even describing potential configuration specs > say otherwise. > Instead admin are forced to rollout a Firefox proxy config plugin which > almost but not quite works, and these days both of them breaks for a few > weeks out of each month. > I can't speak for Firefox (Pat?), but what Mike said definitely applies to Chrome. We already have HTTPS proxy support. Are there other features you'd like us to add on this front? > Me and hundreds of other admin annoyed? yes. Meanwhile we have MITM, and > countless others don't even bother to voice their opinions about it, just > jump straight to MITM. > > AYJ > >Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 23:55:53 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:59 GMT