Re: Transparent vs. Non-transparent Proxy?

On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Steve Cody wrote:

> I have seen the term transparent proxy quite a bit. Can anyone tell
> me the difference between the two, and give me an example? What are
> the benefits of one over the other?
>
> I am thinking it may be this:

No. The term 'transparent proxying' refers to a mechanism by which
service requests are hi-jacked and redirected to a proxy server, which
then fulfills the request; the client is unaware that anything has
happened. This is usually done to gain the benefits of proxying (such as
caching, logging an authentication) without the hassle of configuring
each client program. Arguments against it stem from the fact that some
TCP/IP based protocols (most notably HTTP) are not able to be
transparently redirected in a foolproof manner, and as such problems can
arise that can be very difficult to identify, let alone fix.

> Am I right, or way off? I am getting ready to set up Squid in 4 of my
> business' locations and want to make sure it is what I want. It is being
> installed on Linux.

In a business setting (in your case it sounds like several small
businesses) Internet access is usually a privilege, and as such the system
administrator usually has the clout to require each user to configure
their browser (or to do it for them and require that they not change their
setup). If this is the case for you then I recommend that you avoid
transparent proxying of HTTP - it will inevitably save you worry, time and
effort in the long run.

If you decide on transparent proxying after all, read the Squid FAQ for
instructions for setting it up under Linux.

--
 Kendall Lister, Systems Operator for Charon I.S. - kendall@charon.net.au
  Charon Information Services - Friendly, Cheap Melbourne ISP: 9589 7781