Re: [squid-users] SurfControl Web Filter and Squid incompatibility

Tom.Williams@diversifiedsoftware.com wrote:

> Hi! One of your MIS guys tells me the "SurfControl" web content filtering
> software we won't work with Squid because Squid "encrypts" the packets
> that
> get sent from the proxy to the browser such that "SurfControl" can't "see"
> what URLs are being accessed in case they need to be blocked.
>
> Does Squid do some kind of packet "mangling" that would cause apps like
> "SurfControl" not to work correctly?

No. Squid does not operate at the packet level. The OS deals with
packets. Squid deals with application layer requests, and it does no
encryption, unless you've configured SSL (this is only available in 2.5
and generally used for website acceleration purposes, not general
purpose web caching).

Squid is a normal HTTP proxy, and there is nothing bizarre or 'mangled'
about what traverses between the client and the proxy. It is all
documented by the HTTP specification and Squid follows it quite
faithfully. If Surf Control cannot deal with a proxied connection, then
Surf Control needs some work. I kind of doubt that is the case, but who
knows? (Surf Control also probably does not work at the packet level,
as it is providing application layer services.)

I'll point out that the normal HTTP proxy interface I refer to is used
by /all/ web proxies and web caching proxies. There is nothing specific
to Squid about it. If Surf Control can sit between clients and other
proxies, then it can sit between clients and Squid. If Surf Control
uses some direct link 'into' the proxy, then it is unlikely to work with
Squid, since I know of no Surf Control extensions for Squid.

-- 
Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
Web caching appliances and support.
http://www.swelltech.com