METAbolt logo
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

Using proxy in MB (SOCKS)
Options View
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ron Offline
#1 Posted : 09 August 2010 23:49:26(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Hi metabolt community,

I am trying to use metabolt from work over my SOCKS ssh tunnel. I've run metabolt and checked the box to use proxy, tell it to use localhost : 1080, no user/pass and try to connect and it fails, saying the server closed the connection. The same config works in pidgin, so I was wondering if there were any other special tricks to getting proxy to work?

Any help is much appreciated.
Back to top
 |  Edit by user
Sponsor  
 
Back to top  
Luke Offline
#2 Posted : 10 August 2010 08:45:00(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)


Hi Ron,

Does the proxy work from Internet Explorer i.e. when you enter the details into IE settings?

Thx
Back to top
WWW BLOG
Ron Offline
#3 Posted : 10 August 2010 15:45:11(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Luke:
Thanks for your reply. Yes this proxy works in IE if I go to the connections tab, proxy settings advanced, and type in localhost:1080 in the Socks field.

--R
Back to top
Luke Offline
#4 Posted : 10 August 2010 15:48:12(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)


In the background METAbolt is doing effectively the same thing. Have you tried 127.0.0.1 instead of localhost? And are you putting in the "http://" in the beginning?
Back to top
WWW BLOG
Ron Offline
#5 Posted : 10 August 2010 16:40:09(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
I changed my Proxy URI field to read http://127.0.0.1, with the same result. I know the proxy service works because I can test it in IE and my IM client. Does Metabolt support socks proxy services, or only http proxies?
Back to top
Luke Offline
#6 Posted : 10 August 2010 17:23:00(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)

I missed the SOCKS bit. METAbolt only supports HTTP proxies.

I will look into this part for the next release...
Back to top
WWW BLOG
 |  Edit by user
Ron Offline
#7 Posted : 10 August 2010 17:55:36(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Ah, that explains it then. In that case I can't use MB for now, but if its possible to add that as a feature that would indeed be awesome. Wiki has some decent technical info and links on the subject if you are unfamiliar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOCKS

Other than that thanks for your help!
Back to top
Luke Offline
#8 Posted : 11 August 2010 14:30:08(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)

If you are able to set a socks proxy in IE settings then set it up and leave it like that. Set METAbolt not to use proxy in application/settings and then restart it. When you login it will be using the socks proxy connection by default until you clear/change it from the IE settings again. The point of the HTTP proxy feature in METAbolt is mainly for people who can't get into the IE settings to change them. Other than that whether you set it from METAbolt or IE is the same thing. SOCKS in METAbolt will take a long time to deliver as it is quite involved...not sure how long. But this is a solution until it is done. Does that not work for you?
Back to top
WWW BLOG
 |  Edit by user
Ron Offline
#9 Posted : 16 August 2010 21:27:04(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Luke:
Sadly that doesn't quite work for me. Maybe its too much trouble and I'll have to give up the idea of using SL IM at work. But I'll explain my situation in case I am overlooking something:
I am trying to get metabolt working from my workplace. My company uses an HTTP Proxy for all web traffic, however I don't really want my IMs, and even the fact that I'm USING IMs to be seen by the company, so I have an SSH SOCKS proxy to my home server. I use this with my other external IM clients (Pidgin has SOCKS support built in, and I can use it for AIM/MSN/Facebook), but not with IE because it would slow me down too much and not let me get to internal resources.
Plus I would want to be *really sure* that the proxy was in effect.. call me paranoid but I would rather see a checkbox for "Use this proxy" instead of assuming that it is inhereting my IE settings.
I realize that this is probably not a mainstream desire so I understand if this is not even on the roadmap. Also, I have heard of some 3rd party tools being able to "socksify" programs by acting as a launcher and forwarding all traffic on behalf of the program, I may investigate this option.
Thanks for your time Luke!
Back to top
Luke Offline
#10 Posted : 16 August 2010 21:47:37(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)


Hi Ron,

To be honest the biggest issue is not the amount of work involved in providing this but the fact that it will allow anonymity when connecting to SL. This is a HUGE problem. I am not saying that's what you will do so pls don't get me wrong. What I am trying to say is that providing such a technology within mainstream METAbolt would mean enabling everyone with this ability. For this reason I am unable to consider this as a feature :(

I totally understand your situation and appreciate it and I hope you understand ours.

Thx
Back to top
WWW BLOG
Ron Offline
#11 Posted : 16 August 2010 22:44:40(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Hi Luke,

I'm not quite sure I understand your standpoint; what do you mean when you say that it will allow anonymity? I don't understand what that means, or how it could be "a HUGE problem", since one still has to log in to the grid with thier regular username/pass. What is the potential for abuse here, if everyone had this ability?

Also, 1 message ago you stated the biggest roadblock was that "SOCKS in METAbolt will take a long time to deliver as it is quite involved", but now you say that "the biggest issue is not the amount of work", so I'm even more confused.

As a workaround, I could run metabolt directly on my SSH proxy server because I can also use it for VNC. So I really fail to see how the end result is any different, except for being massively more convienent for me. (Not having to have a VNC session open, not consuming server resources, sound enabled, etc)

As the developer, the decision whether or not to not include "Feature X" in the software is certainly yours, but I am a little disappointed, yes, and definetly unclear on the reasoning.

--Ron
Back to top
Luke Offline
#12 Posted : 16 August 2010 23:14:57(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)


Hi Ron,

This is a difficult area and I should have been straight in my first post. Sorry for being confusing. I have failed to handle this issue as well as I could.

There are many valid reasons to use SOCKS then there are some bad ones. Whether it would have consequences for METAbolt or not is debatable but I chose to avoid anything that might cause us complications and for that reason SOCKS proxy is not a feature we can provide.

:(
Back to top
WWW BLOG
Ron Offline
#13 Posted : 16 August 2010 23:31:36(UTC)


Rank: Newbie

Joined: 09/08/2010(UTC)
Posts: 7

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
Hi Luke,

Thanks for answering my post again. However, I still don't understand there being any potential negatives to this feature request, unless I have missed something you said, or if there is some intrinsic thing inherint in this solution that I am not aware of. If that is the case I apologize for being dense, but would again request more information as to what your concerns are? You yourself have said that there are many valid reasons to use SOCKS, and some "bad ones". I seek not to exploit anything malicious, and wish to use it for a valid reason (explained above). If you could detail the concerns openly, perhaps a solution or workaround could be reached. This is the spirit of open source. However, secrecy and obscurity are not only damaging to a software product but also to the user community, and on a personal note, frustrating.
If you are unable/unwilling to discuss this on the public board, may we go off the record in PM?
Thank you for your time.
Back to top
Luke Offline
#14 Posted : 17 August 2010 01:51:16(UTC)


Rank: Administration

Joined: 17/02/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: United Kingdom

Thanks: 92 times
Was thanked: 123 time(s) in 114 post(s)


I have had a PM conversation with Ron and this thread is sadly closed.

P.S. Why is this subject getting so many views? Have you got something to say? Then step forward like Ron and state them...
Back to top
WWW BLOG
 |  Edit by user
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

SoClean Theme By Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2010, Yet Another Forum.NET
Second Life and SL are trademarks of Linden Research, Inc. METAbolt is not affiliated with or sponsored by Linden Research.

© Copyright 2008-2011 METAbolt.

Design by Dream Web Templates