Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support Man in the Middle with Proxy Chaining #87

Closed
oxtoacart opened this issue Sep 18, 2013 · 13 comments
Closed

Support Man in the Middle with Proxy Chaining #87

oxtoacart opened this issue Sep 18, 2013 · 13 comments

Comments

@oxtoacart
Copy link
Collaborator

The current implementation of MITM per #79 is mutually exclusive with proxy chaining. It would be useful to be able to do proxy chaining and MITM at the same time.

This may be doable by just having the very last proxy in the chain do the MITM stuff.

@cyberflohr
Copy link

This would be a very useful feature! Any work in progress?

@oxtoacart
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@cyberflohr No, there's currently no work in progress on this. If you're interested in taking a look, the best place to start is probably in ProxyToServerConnection.initializeConnectionFlow()

@cyberflohr
Copy link

Thx i'll take a look, but first I've to fix some other littleproxy problems i.e. Proxy shutdown will throw an exception - I'll open a ticket for this.

@cyberflohr
Copy link

proxy shutdown will work now (why ever) -> l'll open no ticket

@ersinciftci
Copy link

any news on this?

@michail-nikolaev
Copy link

+1 vote

@mathanv
Copy link

mathanv commented May 5, 2015

Please support this feature!!

@ganskef
Copy link
Collaborator

ganskef commented May 5, 2015

It's working with ganskef/LittleProxy-mitm, but you need some little modifications to the LittleProxy SNAPSHOT version.

I've contributed it to mockserver too and it's been integrated there.

Am 5. Mai 2015 08:58:56 MESZ, schrieb mathanv notifications@github.com:

Please support this feature!!


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#87 (comment)

@mathanv
Copy link

mathanv commented May 6, 2015

Thanks! I had a look at your modifications but I did not find any changes in DefaultHttpProxyServer and ProxyToServerConnection classes where lies the main switching points between MITM and ChainedProxy. Just wondering how can I enable both, and get them working with your fix.

Please suggest.

@ganskef
Copy link
Collaborator

ganskef commented May 6, 2015

Sorry, I misunderstand you. This implements MITM with a Certificate Authority and dynamic generated keys, but I've never tryed to use it in conjunction with a chained proxy.

Am 6. Mai 2015 15:27:33 MESZ, schrieb mathanv notifications@github.com:

Thanks! I had a look at your modifications but I did not find any
changes in DefaultHttpProxyServer and ProxyToServerConnection classes
where lies the main switching points between MITM and ChainedProxy.
Just wondering how can I enable both, and get them working with your
fix.

Please suggest.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#87 (comment)

@mathanv
Copy link

mathanv commented May 6, 2015

No problem. I am in dire need of using both MITM and ChainedProxy together for recording the request/responses of HTTPS traffic relayed to another web proxy. The worst case which is happening now is that once ChainedProxy mode is enabled all the HTTPS requests get tunneled, and even the GET requests cannot be sniffed by the filters :-(. All one can see is the CONNECT requests here.

@MediumOne
Copy link
Contributor

Raised a PR for this - #251

@jekh
Copy link
Collaborator

jekh commented Mar 17, 2016

This is fixed by @MediumOne's fix, so I'll close this issue.

@jekh jekh closed this as completed Mar 17, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants