[stunnel-users] older browsers, stunnel and privoxy

[Yyy]

How would connection between stunnel and server through proxy work? To verify servers identity, stunnel needs to receive and verify servers certificate and since servers address is defined in config file, anything that modifies traffic between stunnel and server will be seen as mitm and that will break connectivity.
It might be possible to disable certificate verification, but in that case sslstrip would be better solution. (it would have the same security).

On December 9, 2018 3:30:34 PM EET, kovacs janos <kovacsjanosfasz at gmail.com> wrote:
>i mean a proxy that can work with the address of the actual website
>opened in the browser, not just specific addresses defined in the
>config file.
>
>at least i thought thats what you meant with this:
>"In case of client (browser), for each remote (https) server to be
>connected to, stunnnel config file will need an entry;
>in browser it will not be possible to use DNS names (all servers will
>have to be addressed as 127.0.0.1:someport
>where "someport", is port assigned in stunnel conf server entry accept
>statement), so most links in webpages will not work."
>
>if stunnel can only work with specified addresses, cant a proxy like
>privoxy be set up at both ends, and stunnel only has to accept and
>connect to the address of the proxies?
>
>On 12/9/18, Yyy <yyy at yyy.id.lv> wrote:
>> What do you mean by dynamic address proxy?
>>
>> On December 8, 2018 12:39:26 AM EET, kovacs janos
>> <kovacsjanosfasz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>if stunnel can only accept from and forward to one address, cant that
>>>be went around by setting a dynamic address proxy on both sides of
>>>stunnel? like:
>>>proxy - stunnel - proxy
>>>
>>>although i havent been able to connect to even a single website, but
>i
>>>didnt try with specifically the IP
>>>
>>>On 12/7/18, yyy <yyy at yyy.id.lv> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "kovacs janos" <kovacsjanosfasz at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "Flo Rance" <trourance at gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: <stunnel-users at stunnel.org>
>>>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 2:30 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] older browsers, stunnel and privoxy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> now im really not sure, since the wikipedia page on stunnel also
>>>>> describes the program doing exactly what i need in the Example
>>>>> scenario section:
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stunnel#Example_scenario
>>>>>
>>>>> "Network traffic from the client initially passes over SSL to the
>>>>> stunnel application, which transparently encrypts/decrypts traffic
>>>and
>>>>> forwards unsecured traffic to port 25 locally. The mail server
>sees
>>>a
>>>>> non-SSL mail client. "
>>>>>
>>>>> only difference is, i need it to forward "unsecured traffic" to my
>>>>> browser client, not a server. are you all sure its really not
>>>>> possible?
>>>>>
>>>> It is possible with the same limitiations as with server case.
>>>> In case of server, there is one server, which accepts incoming
>>>connections
>>>> (unencrypted) and stunnel accepts unencrypted
>>>> connections for that (one) server and decrypts and forwards them.
>>>There is
>>>> only one server, which gets connected by stunnel.
>>>>
>>>> In case of client (browser), for each remote (https) server to be
>>>connected
>>>> to, stunnnel config file will need an entry;
>>>> in browser it will not be possible to use DNS names (all servers
>will
>>>have
>>>> to be addressed as 127.0.0.1:someport
>>>> where "someport", is port assigned in stunnel conf server entry
>>>accept
>>>> statement), so most links in webpages will not work.
>>>> It may be feasible for small number of servers, which does not
>links
>>>any
>>>> external resources.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> stunnel-users mailing list
>>>> stunnel-users at stunnel.org
>>>> https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.stunnel.org/pipermail/stunnel-users/attachments/20181209/82489d42/attachment.html>