-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
We all hope this will be done.
Thanks, Alex, you are heard me.
29.10.15 4:12, Eliezer Croitoru пишет:
> Is it possible to say thanks in advance? or will it won't work the same way
> as after?
>
> Anyway Thanks,
> Eliezer
>
> On 28/10/2015 23:24,
Is it possible to say thanks in advance? or will it won't work the same
way as after?
Anyway Thanks,
Eliezer
On 28/10/2015 23:24, Alex Rousskov wrote:
FWIW, Factory is working on implementing automatic certificate fetching
feature. That is a huge feature but we are making good progress.
Meanwh
On 10/28/2015 08:09 AM, Yuri Voinov wrote:
> At a minimum, it should write the information on them in the log - in
> an understandable form
I suspect everybody agrees with that statement. I am sure this will be
implemented eventually. No need to argue about that.
Alex.
> 28.10.15 19:55, Amos
On 10/28/2015 07:55 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> What is missing is just some CA in the chain. It needs to be located
> somehow, only then can the decision happen about whether to trust or not
> and see if another up the chain is needed too.
If you are right, then this could be related to bug 4305 t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
It seems to me that all this functionality must be enabled by default in
the SSL proxies. As the base. Do not I have to wrestle with where (and
how) to take intermediate certificates. Or how to define an unknown CA root.
A proxy.
At a minimum, i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Browser do. Bump-enabled proxy is not.
This is significantly limits the possibility of operating SSL bump in a
more or less large installations.
In addition, not every system administrator is able to write any complex
helper in any language. I me
On 28/10/2015 11:57 p.m., Yuri Voinov wrote:
>
>
> 28.10.15 16:47, Amos Jeffries пишет:
>> On 28/10/2015 11:35 p.m., Yuri Voinov wrote:
>>> Hi gents.
>>>
>>> I think, all of you who use Bump, seen much this messages in your
>>> cache.log.
>>>
>>> SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert certificate unknown
>>
yes thats right Yuri
--
View this message in context:
http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/SSL3-READ-BYTES-sslv3-alert-certificate-unknown-tp4674186p4674190.html
Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
squid-u
28.10.15 16:47, Amos Jeffries пишет:
On 28/10/2015 11:35 p.m., Yuri Voinov wrote:
Hi gents.
I think, all of you who use Bump, seen much this messages in your
cache.log.
SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert certificate unknown
AFAIK, no way to identify which CA is absent in your setup.
I propose to
On 28/10/2015 11:35 p.m., Yuri Voinov wrote:
> Hi gents.
>
> I think, all of you who use Bump, seen much this messages in your
> cache.log.
>
> SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert certificate unknown
>
> AFAIK, no way to identify which CA is absent in your setup.
>
> I propose to consider the following
Hi gents.
I think, all of you who use Bump, seen much this messages in your cache.log.
SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert certificate unknown
AFAIK, no way to identify which CA is absent in your setup.
I propose to consider the following questions: how do properly support
SSL proxy, if you can not i
11 matches
Mail list logo
