[stunnel-users] older browsers, stunnel and privoxy

[Ludolf Holzheid]

On Wed, 2018-12-19 16:13:25 +0100, kovacs janos wrote:
> so stunnel doesnt rewrite the headers besides the encryption?

Yes.

> does
> that mean only stunnel can receive traffic forwarded by itself,

There are other protocols than HTTP, without the need for re-writing
contents while encrypting/decrypting, such as e.g. POP3.

The peculiarity of HTTP is, it thrives on the links from one resource
to another.  If you change the way the resources are retrieved, you
have to change their addresses in both, the request you send to the
server and the the document you present to the client.

> and
> can only work if both ends of the tunnel are defined and connected?

This depends on the terminology.


If 'the tunnel' is the section of the path where the data is
encrypted, then yes, both ends of the tunnel must be defined.

If 'stunnel works' means actual data flow, then yes, there obviously
must be a connection between the tunnel ends.


A stunnel process is listening on a configured TCP port for connection
requests and, depending on the configuration, may accept any client
that reaches the stunnel process.  If 'the tunnel' includes the path
from the client to the stunnel process, then no, the client end of the
tunnel is not defined beforehand.

If a client is accepted, the stunnel process sets up a connection to
the configured server (which may be, but does not have to be, a second
stunnel process).  If 'stunnel works' means the stunnel process is up
and waiting for connection requests, then no, there is no need for a
connection for stunnel to work.


Ludolf

-- 

Ludolf Holzheid
 
Bihl+Wiedemann GmbH
Floßwörthstraße 41
68199 Mannheim, Germany
 
Tel: +49 621 33996-0
Fax: +49 621 3392239
 
mailto:lholzheid at bihl-wiedemann.de
http://www.bihl-wiedemann.de
 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Mannheim
Geschäftsführer: Jochen Bihl, Bernhard Wiedemann
Amtsgericht Mannheim, HRB 5796