Squid+Privoxy or Snort?
Bart Silverstrim
bsilver at chrononomicon.com
Fri Nov 12 19:42:50 GMT 2004
On Nov 12, 2004, at 2:22 PM, TM4526 at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 11/12/04 1:22:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> bsilver at chrononomicon.com writes:
> > The issue with proxies is that they are a drag on your network; using
> > squid as a firewall only isnt very smart. If you are already using it
> > fine. But on a large network you are better off using a firewall or
> > some
> > sort of bandwidth management like the stuff on etinc.com.
>
> >I thought his issue was more on finding internal systems having
> >problems and blocking the specific sites from getting hit.
> >
> >The proxy should speed up access if the same sites are being hit, as
>
> The "proxy" doesn't "speed access", the cache does. So using
> squidguard without squid enabled, or privoxy or SNORT which are
> not caches, is what I was referring to.
>
> proxy != Cache
>
> which is I think is your confusion.
Sorry, I hadn't run across anyone running squid in a non-caching mode
so I didn't specify that. SquidGuard is purely a filter and it can't
run without squid, to my knowledge. But I could be wrong.
More information about the freebsd-questions
mailing list