Re: [squid-users] User Agent Setting Not Being Used

On 06/15/2013 06:38 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 16/06/2013 3:34 a.m., CACook wrote:
<SNIP>
>
> On the topic of anonymity and help with anonymous proxy configuration;
> Sadly it *is* the one topic you are most likely never to get people
> openly posting lots of details about. The ones who know most are
> unlikely to want their details permanently distributed on this list
> archive. Unlike proper privacy when a "trick" or protection of anonymity
> is outed it drops in usefulness as "them" learn about it and devise ().
> Everybodies opinions of what headers should be added/removed or
> replaced (and with what) is different. Removing and altering other
> services headers is itself a violation of the HTTP specifications by the
> proxy. So everybody who actually *uses* these directives is pretty much
> abusing HTTP. "We the Project" don't offer an official opinion or
> recommendation about should or should not for most headers - as
> demonstrated by that config file text being a simple notice of the old
> features deprecation and a list of what the old feature did in terms of
> the new one, not an endorsement or guarantee of any header in it.
> In short you are left to devise the method for your own anonymity - we
> can but help if some specific goes wrong.
>
> Amos
>
Or just use ICAP if a really complex system is required.
I have seen some abuse of browser info and user agent headers as of to
push into the client browser specific data.

I dont like the idea of everybody knows what is going on inside my
browser but what can I not expose? some yahoo news? some holy stuff?
linux related stuff?

Since these are the basic usage that most honest and decent users will
do I do not afraid that someone will see my search for "רמב"ם" or for bible.

Eliezer
Received on Sun Jun 16 2013 - 14:14:14 MDT