similar to: Help connecting to SOCKS5 proxy server with Open SSH

> Winton-- > > Excellent! Absolutely wonderful. > > I'm wondering which apps/encapsulators support 4A? This gets me > around > the DNS leakage problem quite nicely. > > Incidentally, we do need SOCKS5 support -- if for no other > reason, the > fact that there's *operating system* level support in OSX for SOCKS5 > redirection. So

Attached is a very small patch that allows the ssh clients to use the socks5 library. It should work with socks4 but is untested. Tested on linux only configure --with-socks configure --with-socks5 Also included is a configure option to disable scp statistics --disable-scp-stats modified files openssh-2.9.9p2/acconfig.h openssh-2.9.9p2/channels.c openssh-2.9.9p2/configure.in

I love SSH's ability to dynamically forward ports using SOCKS (either -D or DynamicForward) (ie "ssh -D 1081 private.mine.net"). But the thing that has caused me some pain, is that only SOCKS4 is supported. The SOCKS4 proxy specification does not permit hostnames, but only IP addresses. This isn't much of a problem if the target host is a public Internet host or otherwise DNS

Hi all. I was getting something working over socks5 and was trying to figure out why it kept using socks4. It wasn't, it was just a misleading debug message.... Patch applies to either OpenBSD or Portable. -- Darren Tucker (dtucker at zip.com.au) GPG key 8FF4FA69 / D9A3 86E9 7EEE AF4B B2D4 37C9 C982 80C7 8FF4 FA69 Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience

On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:26:57PM -0400, Ault, James R (CRD) wrote: > I was reading the changelog from version 2.9 that was recently released, and I coudln't help noticing > this item: > > from openssh changelog: > > - markus at cvs.openbsd.org 2001/04/17 12:55:04 > [channels.c ssh.c] > undo socks5 and https support since they are not really used and >

Hi, Currently, OpenSSH only accepts the SOCKS5 command "CONNECT": <https://anongit.mindrot.org/openssh.git/tree/channels.c#n1281> The RFC also specifies the commands "BIND" and "UDP ASSOCIATE": <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1928#section-4> As a consequence, in particular, a SOCKS5 server started with "ssh -D" cannot proxify UDP packets. Are

I have a few patches for AIX. The patchfile is attached below. The patch has been tested on AIX4.2 and AIX4.3. The patch is on openssh-1.2.1pre25, with openssl-0.94, using RSAref. 1) authenticate support - this function allows the system to determine authentification. Whatever the system allows for login, authenticate will too. It doesn't matter whether it is AFS, DFS, SecureID, local.

Le mercredi 18 janvier 2017 ? 8:55 +1100, Darren Tucker a ?crit : > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 07:42:50AM -0800, Ron Frederick wrote: Thank you for your answers. > [...] > > One thing that makes UDP over SOCKS more complicated for SSH is that > > SOCKS normally keeps the UDP packets it forwards as UDPl, just adding > > a small header to each packet. If you want to get the

Le mardi 17 janvier 2017 ? 9:20 +1100, Darren Tucker a ?crit : > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Romain Vimont <rom at rom1v.com> wrote: > [...] > > As a consequence, in particular, a SOCKS5 server started with "ssh -D" > > cannot proxify UDP packets. > > > > Are there deep reasons why OpenSSH does not implement them (security, or > >

What is the state of the art for socks5 server software? I need to replace a very old proxy system. 'Yum search' and google aren't turning up any clear winners unless '3proxy' is the thing you would run on CentOS7. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com

Hi, Some programs, which requires network, do not support proxy mechanism such as SOCKS5. There is a tool called proxychains (http://proxychains.sf.net) which provides us to redirect all of the network traffic to a defined server can be SOCKS4, 5, or others. For instance, I can use proxychains wget http://www.google.com to download the homepage of google if I am behind the proxy. This is quiet

On Jan 17, 2017, at 1:37 AM, Darren Tucker <dtucker at zip.com.au> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Romain Vimont <rom at rom1v.com> wrote: > [..] >> So if I understand correctly, making "ssh -D" create a "full" SOCKS5 >> server, including UDP relay?, would require to add a new SSH request >> type (like "relay-udp")? >

Hello list, I wonder why tinc tries to resolve host names before connection even with configured (socks5) proxy which fails behind restrictive firewalls. Is there any "workaround"? Thanks in advance! Regards Uwe -------------- n?chster Teil -------------- Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt... URL:

is openssh going to ever contain socks4/5 proxy support (http://www.socks.nec.com/) the same way ssh (nonfree version) does? Without this support, openssh is completely unusable behind a firewall. Hayden A. James

This provides SOCKS4A support, which allows a SOCKS4 client to provide a host name instead of an IP address. It indicates that it's doing so by using a known-invalid IP address 0.0.0.x (where x != 0), and then appending the NUL-terminated hostname to the connection request. Although we check for the terminating NUL manually and the 'fatal(len %d > have %d)' should never happen, the

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2417 Bug ID: 2417 Summary: SOCKS5 should respond with appropriate error reply in error situations Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 6.8p1 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2250 Bug ID: 2250 Summary: SOCKS5 should return "NO ACCEPTABLE METHODS" instead of nothing Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5

Hi, has anybody seen a patch that provides socks version 5 support for the dynamic portforwarding feature? I?ve seen thats implemented in ssh.com?s ssh version, but found nothing about openssh. Only thing i found was a patch to provide socks4a. cu sleepi

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:33:35PM +0000, Uwe Werler wrote: > I wonder why tinc tries to resolve host names before connection even > with configured (socks5) proxy which fails behind restrictive firewalls. You are right that it shouldn't be necessary to do this with SOCKS5. With SOCKS4, it needs to know the exact address, and then I just used that for SOCKS5 as well. > Is there

Hello Guus, thanks for Your fast reply. Does it mean only socks is affected and http proxy should work? If this is the case then this may be a temp. solution. Thanks and regards! Uwe Am 27.10.2015 14:08:36, schrieb Guus Sliepen: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:33:35PM +0000, Uwe Werler wrote: > > > I wonder why tinc tries to resolve host names before connection even > > with