Post Reply 
XUProxy status update
Oct. 17, 2009, 12:49 AM (This post was last modified: Oct. 17, 2009 12:53 AM by andrew_w.)
Post: #1
XUProxy status update
I am preparing to release version 0.1.0 of XUProxy, my proxy with Proxomitron-compatible header/content filtering, soon.

This will be the first version to actually include the header and content filters (the previous version was transparent only). The full Proxomitron matching/replacement languages (minus a few escapes and commands) will be supported. No user interface other than URL commands will be included (I plan to eventually add an external wxWidgets front end and an internal web-based configuration interface).

This version is beta quality at best - the filters are a bit on the slow side, and haven't been tested very much on actual sites.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 18, 2009, 03:14 PM
Post: #2
RE: XUProxy status update
Keep us informed when version 0.1.0 is available for download. Smile!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 18, 2009, 11:51 PM
Post: #3
RE: XUProxy status update
looks interesting,let us know.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 19, 2009, 09:34 AM
Post: #4
RE: XUProxy status update
Yep! Tell us when it is available Smile!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 19, 2009, 02:00 PM
Post: #5
RE: XUProxy status update
Should be very interesting to see if it processes the filtering rules faster than Proxo self!
At any rate, very happy that the immediate future of Proxo is secured by the successful tests on Windows-7 32-bits. Smile! Support for 64-bit and IPv6 remains another story, also with regards to this thread: http://prxbx.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1446
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 19, 2009, 07:58 PM (This post was last modified: Oct. 19, 2009 08:01 PM by andrew_w.)
Post: #6
RE: XUProxy status update
(Oct. 19, 2009 02:00 PM)defconnect Wrote:  Should be very interesting to see if it processes the filtering rules faster than Proxo self!
At any rate, very happy that the immediate future of Proxo is secured by the successful tests on Windows-7 32-bits. Smile! Support for 64-bit and IPv6 remains another story, also with regards to this thread: <a href="http://prxbx.com/forums/showthread.php">http://prxbx.com/forums/showthread.php</a>?tid=1446

At the moment, the content and header filters are slower than the Proxomitron, even with the C version of the filters enabled (most of XUProxy is written in Python, but there are optional C versions of parts of the matching/filtering modules). I think that it's partially because the C matching code still does a lot of Python attribute accesses. I'll try to optimize it further in the version after 0.1.0.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 19, 2009, 08:41 PM
Post: #7
RE: XUProxy status update
Thanks for the update and looking forward to XUProxy's further development.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 20, 2009, 05:55 AM
Post: #8
RE: XUProxy status update
I thought XUProxy was supposed to be for Unix-based operating systems? How are you going to compare its speed on Mac OS or Linux with Proxomitron on Windows - with a stopwatch?
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 21, 2009, 11:55 PM
Post: #9
RE: XUProxy status update
(Oct. 20, 2009 05:55 AM)Siamesecat Wrote:  I thought XUProxy was supposed to be for Unix-based operating systems? How are you going to compare its speed on Mac OS or Linux with Proxomitron on Windows - with a stopwatch?

That's basically what I did. I use the nc command to send a request, and the time command to print the time that it takes for the request to finish.

Also, XUProxy is highly portable, and will run on just about any system that runs Python 2.4 or later and Twisted 2.5 or later. I've only actually tested on Unix, but there's no Unix-specific code at the moment other than startup code (there is generic startup code in addition to the Unix-specific version), and if I do add any other Unix-specific features, they will be completely optional just like the Unix startup code. The only real problem on Windows would be the lack of support for running as a service (if I'm not mistaken, programs have to use some kind of special API to run as a service, which is unlike Unix init systems that don't require anything specific of programs that they start).
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 22, 2009, 09:15 AM
Post: #10
RE: XUProxy status update
(Oct. 21, 2009 11:55 PM)andrew_w Wrote:  The only real problem on Windows would be the lack of support for running as a service

I don't think that would be a problem. There are third party programs which could do that.

Maybe someones like but I myself prefer not starting the proxy server as a service. You can just let people to decide how they would start the program.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Oct. 29, 2009, 04:46 PM
Post: #11
RE: XUProxy status update
I have been waiting for an application like XUProxy. At the moment I run Proxomitron with Wine on Ubuntu Linux. I can't wait to get rid of Wine. Although Proxomitron has served me well over the years, I would like to run my Linux box without any Windows application installed on it.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Jan. 03, 2010, 02:30 AM (This post was last modified: Jan. 03, 2010 02:30 AM by andrew_w.)
Post: #12
RE: XUProxy status update
It took me a little bit longer than expected, but I think that I've fixed all the major issues now, and will hopefully be ready to release 0.1.0 in the next few weeks. I think that all that I have left to do is write some decent unit tests for the filtering library in order to make sure that it is actually working properly. As I said before, this release will be far from feature complete (beta if you want to be really generous, but alpha would probably be more accurate), but basic Proxomitron-compatible header and content filtering should be working reasonably well.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Jul. 06, 2010, 06:06 AM (This post was last modified: Jul. 06, 2010 06:09 AM by andrew_w.)
Post: #13
RE: XUProxy status update
I was way too optimistic in my previous post about how long it would take, but I have now finally completed the unit tests (it's a good thing that I wrote some unit tests, because I found several major bugs in the filtering engine using them). I also added a few more minor features.

I will release 0.1.0 shortly (hopefully for real this time). I just want to test the filter on a few more actual sites first. Anybody who wants to try out 0.1.0 before I release it can download the sources from the XUProxy Mercurial repository on SF.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Jul. 08, 2010, 02:10 PM
Post: #14
RE: XUProxy status update
Assuming HTTPS support, how exactly does XUProxy handle HTTPS traffic? If it does not, will it be able to "hook up with" whenever's ProxHTTPSProxy: http://prxbx.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1618 ?
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Jul. 10, 2010, 09:50 AM
Post: #15
RE: XUProxy status update
Thanks for your free work Andrew_w!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump: