> Concerns?
> 1) transparent interception == man-in-middle attack.
> 2) private details of clients are opened to you and anyone who gets
> access to the middle machine.
> 3) clients may be made aware by the security systems involved that you
> are attacking them.
>
> The only semi-legitimate arguments towards doing it in the first place
> is
> for anti-virus scanning etc. Which adequate server or client AV systems
> make useless anyway. All other control measures are human rights
> violations of privacy, which is illegal in most parts of the world.
I understand, but, for example my ISP does transparent proxy'ing, it has an
option to disable it but by default it's on. When talking about illegal
stuff, in a big company this an Nacional ISP nobody will do anything about
it.
Transparent proxy for me, has only has purpose, IM blocking!
Received on Mon Apr 27 2009 - 08:19:51 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 27 2009 - 12:00:02 MDT