- From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 07:25:55 +0200 (EET)
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>
Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>: (Fri Feb 17 07:05:28 2017) > > I fail to see what a side-channel would even add in this case. > > There's already communication between the client and the proxy. It's > the CONNECT request message and its response. > > It was the abandonment of that response in non-200 cases that led to the > need to deploy MitM. For that use case I suggested change for browser UI (show buttow for [View proxy message] and "navigate" to that message and change location bar to reflect proxy URL). That is even needed for regular CONNECT errors (when proxy is not doing blocking). / Kari Hurtta
Received on Friday, 17 February 2017 05:26:52 UTC