Post Reply 
Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
Mar. 23, 2015, 02:37 AM
Post: #91
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
(Mar. 22, 2015 09:30 PM)herbalist Wrote:  The DLLs in the above post aren't working for me. The ones from post #35 are working.

On Win98? If so that may be expected. https://slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html lists some extra steps for Windows 95, 98, Me, and NT4.

I believe amy built the DLLs in post #35.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 23, 2015, 03:45 AM
Post: #92
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
Having trouble on XP as well, as are a few readers at Wilders.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 23, 2015, 11:20 AM
Post: #93
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
SSL is the biggest HEADACHE and NUISANCE known to man !!!...

the Proxo user-base is but a tiny FRACTION of what it used to be Sad
"newbies" that do tip their toe in the water discard it and throw it away within MINUTES of the toe-tip, it's "too complex" or there's just too many "certificate warnings"

the Proxo user-base is no longer a collective group of folks looking to "simply" remove advertisements but have never looked at HTML code in their life and wouldn't know the difference between decimal and hexidecimal

the Proxo user-base, or so it seems, is now a more geeky crowd that see reading HTML as more "recreational" than curling up with a blanket and reading a good book by the glow of a winter fireplace


point is, we have migrated into a more geeky bunch and i firmly believe that we serve ourselves better by REMOVING the [email protected] cert-check behavior ALTOGETHER instead of trying to "patch" it

by REMOVING it ENTIRELY, i would have a Proxo .exe that will function *AS-IS* for the next DECADE, without any "patches" from those smarter than i

if i rely on a [email protected] "patch", then just what happens a YEAR from now, six MONTHS from now ???
what if "amy" has moved on like so many Proxo users have?
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 23, 2015, 03:46 PM
Post: #94
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
JJoe Wrote:I believe amy built the DLLs in post #35.
I didn't realize that those were altered. Nothing in the post gave that indication.
From post 35
Quote:Then you will need to use OpenSSL DLLs version 1.0.1l which I attached. These are compiled from the official source and should not need any patching to work on Win9x nor the VC redistributable package; the DLLs here should work too, but I haven't tested them. I started testing this patch with 1.0.1j, which should also work as should all the versions going back to 1.0.1a, but the latest version fixes a few bugs so it would be better to use them.
A little consistency would be a big help. It needs to be clear if Proxomitron will use the released versions of OpenSSL libraries or if they need to be modified. If they need to be modified, that needs to be made clear. With OpenSSL updating so often, this could quickly become a continuous problem. I've got so many different versions of these DLLs that I'm losing tract of which is which, where they came from, which are originals and which are modified.

@ProxRocks
I tend to agree with you. IMO, HTTPS is broken by design. All of the security features they're adding like STS are building on a broken foundation. Securing the connections has become an exercise in futility. That said, more and more sites are forcing its use. We either have to filter it or bypass. Myself, I've become quite dependent on ProxBlox and its NoScript-like abilities. I don't want to give that up. Given a choice, I'd like to see it work properly. If that's not possible on a long term basis, I'd settle for a way to shut the certificate warnings off as long as the filtering works.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 23, 2015, 05:44 PM
Post: #95
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
(Mar. 23, 2015 03:46 PM)herbalist Wrote:  
JJoe Wrote:I believe amy built the DLLs in post #35.
I didn't realize that those were altered. Nothing in the post gave that indication.

(Jan. 16, 2015 03:24 PM)amy Wrote:  Then you will need to use OpenSSL DLLs version 1.0.1l which I attached. These are compiled from the official source and should not need any patching to work on Win9x nor the VC redistributable package;

Tells me the DLLs are not from Shining Light and implies amy compiled them.

(Jan. 16, 2015 03:24 PM)amy Wrote:  the DLLs here should work too, but I haven't tested them.

Tells me the DLLs from Shining Light should work but have not been tested.

There are currently 4 versions of OpenSSL , https://www.openssl.org/news/ .
I can conveniently test on Win7 64bit. 1.0.2a appears to work for me.
I'll check the other versions on XP when I get a chance.

There is always the choice to use old DLLs (we did this for many years) or Stone-D's patches.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 23, 2015, 11:40 PM (This post was last modified: Mar. 24, 2015 12:51 AM by JJoe.)
Post: #96
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
(Mar. 23, 2015 03:45 AM)herbalist Wrote:  Having trouble on XP as well, as are a few readers at Wilders.

The Shining Light v1.0.2a dlls worked for me on XP Pro sp3 32 bit.
Did you and the others install Visual C++ 2008 Redistributables on your machines?

Also, would you test the dlls at http://indy.fulgan.com/SSL/ ? I am interested in i386-win32 versions posted in March 2015.
The ReadMe claims "no noteworthy dependencies" and "Windows 2000 up to Windows 8". It may be that Win98 was not tested.



I scanned the "Food for thought" thread at Wilders.
Browser choice is important. Mozilla (Firefox, Palemoon, etc) rejects self-signed certs. So half-ssl or an extension or hacking is needed to handle alerts from the browser about the Proxomitron's cert.

Regarding Proxomitron's license, there is more to it but
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/prox...pics/16405

Scott R. Lemmon Wrote:My advice to anyone wishing to distribute modifications is to use a
good patch making program - for example...

http://www.clickteam.com/English/patchmaker.php

You can then have people apply the patch to the base install (provided
separately). A good patch program will create an archive that only
contains differences between two sets of files. That keeps it clear
that it's your own work and free from any part of the original
program's copyrighted material.

Regards,

-Scott

Edit: Added sp3 to "XP Pro sp3 32 bit"
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 12:32 AM
Post: #97
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
Quote:Did you and the others install Visual C++ 2008 Redistributables on your machines?
A quick check shows VC+ redistributables 2008 are installed. No idea if the other posters at Wilders have it installed.
Quote:However, would you test the dlls at http://indy.fulgan.com/SSL/ ? I am interested in i386-win32 versions posted in March 2015.
The ReadMe claims "no noteworthy dependencies" and "Windows 2000 up to Windows 8". It may be that Win98 was not tested.
They worked fine on the virtual XP. Not working on 98, even with VC+2008.
Quote:I scanned the "Food for thought" post at Wilders.
Browser choice is important. Mozilla (Firefox, Palemoon, etc) rejects self-signed certs.
That gets more interesting. I'm also running an older PaleMoon on my 98 unit. It does accept the Proxomitron certificate, as does SeaMonkey.

It may not be apparent in that thread, but there's a growing distrust of Mozilla, especially FireFox and a good amount of frustration over the alternatives, or lack of. As fast as they're changing, how can a user be sure that those changes don't make the bypassing of extensions like NoScript a real possibility? That's one of the main reason I prefer Proxomitron. Short of removing the ability to use a proxy, nothing that they change can bypass it. Based on what I've seen there, if the HTTPS and certificate issues can be addressed, a fair number of people would be using it again.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 12:52 AM
Post: #98
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
Are you testing with xp service pack 3?
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 01:07 AM
Post: #99
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
Yes. That virtual unit is XP-Pro SP3.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 03:36 AM
Post: #100
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
What is the difference between the DLLs you asked me to test and the official versions?
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 04:24 AM
Post: #101
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
They are both "official" in that OpenSSL links to them, http://www.openssl.org/about/binaries.html .

Shining Light Productions, "Works with MSVC++, Builder 3/4/5, and MinGW. Comes in form of self-install executables."

Fulgan, "Pre-compiled Win32/64 libraries without external dependencies to the Microsoft Visual Studio Runtime DLLs, except for the system provided msvcrt.dll"

Fulgan does not need Visual C++ 2008 Redistributables.
Additionally, (if they work) files are easily extracted from the zip. Build Info in the ReadMe is welcome.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 04:25 AM (This post was last modified: Mar. 24, 2015 06:36 AM by johnp.)
Post: #102
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
(Mar. 23, 2015 11:20 AM)ProxRocks Wrote:  SSL is the biggest HEADACHE and NUISANCE known to man !!!...

...

I don't mean to post this here since I made a thread in the General forum a month ago but had only one discussion to it.

There's a japanese fork of Proxymodo that being actively developed openly on github. It's basically a clone of Proximitron. Everything is working including filtering HTTPS. It has its own cert generator. Most of Proximitrons' syntaxes are the same with a few minor changes. I was able to copy all of my Proximitron filters over to Proxydomo and it's working nicely. Oh and it even has its own landing https server if you need to load secure resources to https pages.

I encourage any coder in here to check it out. Everything is working nicely already, but there are always room for improvement. Right now, https encoding/decoding is taxing the cpu and I'd like to see it reduced. So I highly encourage any coder in here help him develope it or fork into your own.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 03:46 PM
Post: #103
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
@JJoe
Before your last post, I was not aware that there was more than one official version. The Shining Light Productions versions were the only Windows versions that I knew of. I'll keep the 1.0.1L versions that work on both OS with Amy's patch, wipe this DLL hell off of my desktop, and stick with learning the filters better.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 24, 2015, 04:55 PM (This post was last modified: Jun. 15, 2018 11:28 AM by amy.)
Post: #104
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
The DLLs I posted should be fine with 98SE and above. Make sure, that you do not put them anywhere, but only in same directory as your (patched) Proxomitron.exe
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Mar. 27, 2015, 03:58 AM
Post: #105
RE: Adapting proxo 4.5 to the latest OpenSSL DLLs
@amy
Except for the odd issue with SocksCap, your modifications work very well with the DLLs you linked. I very much appreciate the work you've put into it. I suspect that maintaining compatibility with OpenSSL may prove to be the equivalent of chasing a moving target.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump: