Re: [squid-users] Fw:Re: [squid-users] squid 3.2.0.18 transparent nat interception

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 21:44:02 +1200

On 31/08/2012 11:57 p.m., Pawel Mojski wrote:
> W dniu 31-Aug-12 03:41, Amos Jeffries pisze:
> [...]
>>
>> Pawl started his problem description with "on the gateway". Which is
>> a phrase usually only used by people with separate gateway and Squid
>> devices. Meaning he very probably is doing NAT on packets outdside of
>> the Squid box - the #1 side effect of doing things that way is the
>> SYN packet problem he described.
>>
>> NAT creates a lie in the packet headers. The gateway box is lying to
>> Squid box about where the packets are destined. Squid now operates
>> transparently (when possible) "believes" that lie and sends the
>> request there, just like any bridge or switch would if the proxy were
>> turned off.
>
> Thanks Amos for detailed answer.
>
> Because I want to make my squid public avaible over internet (with
> auth ofcourse) I have to allow other users to create:
> iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to
> my.public.ip.address:8081 on their own routers, I have no other
> way then proxy chaining squid3.1->squid3.2.

So you want to create what the security industry calls an "open proxy"?
That is what NAT on external devices does. Anybody anywhere in the world
can NAT packets into your proxy and Squid will log that they are coming
from inside your Squid-3.1 box, you have zero control and zero protection.

You can use tunnels (VPN, GRE, IP-over-IP tunnels) to pass the packets
from the remote routers to yours without loosing the IP details. If they
are doing it for privacy SNAT is acceptible to hide the client details,
all that Squid requires is accurate destination details.

Amos
Received on Mon Sep 03 2012 - 09:44:15 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Sep 03 2012 - 12:00:03 MDT