On 1/20/2015 8:42 PM, Scott Klement wrote:
For this reason, it's not necessary to have separate SSL
communication with the proxy itself (vs. the destination server) and
so there's no need for certificate "replacement".

In this situation the organization wants to be able to decrypt the SSL traffic ... so the proxy substitutes the certificate the target server uses with it's own.

This isn't something I'm trying to implement ... it already exists. If the customer goes to a SSL site, the CA is that shows up when you look at the SSL encryption information identifies the proxy as the CA instead of the actual site's CA.

Steve Gibson did a writeup on this ... https://www.grc.com/fingerprints.htm

I am trying to determine how prevalent this is and if I need to provide specific support for the situation (i.e., accepting an untrusted certificate).

david


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.