[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: privoxy/firefox

FF does SOCKS 5 securely, so I don't see why you couldn't. The only reason I do is because I'm paranoid and use Squid to filter out some http headers. Squid doesn't know SOCKS, so I need privoxy for http--->socks translation. Unless you're doing what I just described, you shouldn't have to.

Arrakis Tor wrote:

Other than not having cookies blocked, Is there anything to lose by
not having privoxy installed, and using firefox as its own sock5
proxy? Does this compromise security by dns headers?

This is in reference to: