Re: SOCKS

["Tony Schliesser" <aschlies () citynet net>]

I don't think this question has a striaght forward answer. Not all proxies
are created equal.  Comaring wingate to MS's proxy server is just not right,
regardless as to what some think of proxy servers.

Socks, at least the flavors I have used, have worked well.  Like all types
of applications, the approperateness is relative to the situation.

My concerns about socks and proxies have a lot to do with trusting the
abilities of the programmer who coded the software to do it right as well as
understanding the baggage the archetechure of the application as well as the
baggage the underlying OS brings.  These concerns are leveled at all
solutions, not to just proxies or socks servers.

As to part 2 of your question, you must either have socks compliant client
software OR find a commercial product (sidenote: was looking at one last
night at www.hummingbird.com/freestuff.html , and no I don't work for them
either,  for example) that will make all apps use socks transparently.

Hope this helps.
Tony
Citynet
A Division of City National Bank
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Hayden <path () terrestrial net>
To: 'firewall-wizards () nfr net' <firewall-wizards () nfr net>
Date: Sunday, September 20, 1998 8:47 PM
Subject: SOCKS


> This may be a lame question, but I'd like help trying to figure out how
> SOCKS compares to a traditional proxy server.  What software do I need at
> the SOCKS server and what do I need at a client machine?  Do I need a
> special SOCKS-ified version of Telnet and FTP in order to traverse the
> SOCKS host?
>
> Also, what are the benefits of using SOCKS as opposed to a stateful or
> session layer firewall?
>
> All responses are appreciated.  All flames will be ignored.
>
> Thanks,
> Pat Hayden