Thanks for the info zappa! Has anyone used this proxy? How does it compare to The Proxomitron? I am currently using the latter, but as it's development has been stopped I am wondering whether it would be better in the long run to switch to a fully-supported and developing program. Any thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated. Regards, Gnostic
Since this topic is so hot ( ), I though I would go ahead and try Privoxy. So far I like what I see. It has a small footprint and I believe a little faster (on Opera) than The Proxomitron. It blocks ads and popups as efficiently as Proxo. It has been very stable on Win98se with no crashes or freezeups. It seems as flexible and configurable as Proxo. I like Proxo, but as it is no longer being developed, I thought I would try a proxy that is being actively developed and supported. All in all, Privoxy seems to be a good alternative to The Proxomitron. Regards, Gnostic
Privoxy? No thanks, the last time i tried it was extremlely unuser friendly. And people complain about the steep learning curve of Proxomitron. Privoxy makes proxomitron look easy. Besides, what functions do you want that proxomitron doesnt do?
JayK: What version did you use? The newest, 3.0.2, is very user friendly. I've had no trouble using it. There is a mailing list for discussion of uses and problems. I didn't say I wanted more functions or that Privoxy had functions that Proxo didn't have. I simply said I wished a proxy that was being actively developed and supported. Regards. Gnostic
Currently I am a satisfied Proxomitron user however I may give privoxy a try, but not immediately. Seems a little buggy still to me with memory leak fixes and other bug fixes in latest release 3.0.2: - Fixed two memory leaks, one serious - Fixed a bug in pcrs which could cause crashes with user-defined filters - Fixed a bug in domain name matching - Added workaround for Bug in Mac OSX that made Privoxy crash occasionally (not that I'm a MAC user, just another example of buggyness) - Fixed a potential (application-level, NOT OS-level!) security problem involving remote toggling or action file manipulation by mailicious websites. just snooping around what I like about this so far is: + We do not use the registry of Windows. + small footprint not a resource hog + Replaced "nimda" with more general "ie-exploits" filter in which all filters for IE exploits shall be collected I especially like the last item, assuming privoxy is not vulnerable to remote shut down, this can be an option for those who prefer not to install the latest fix from M$ for whatever reason. Great idea to have a central collection of these filters which defeat Windows exploits without the need of installing the MS fixes. will also be looking for some automated type of filter writing mechanism sort of like the record macro feature in Excel - that would be sweet.
Not fair i never got to learn about proxy's is it complicated hows it work im a newbie and what about that program called peekboo how that work
Sure you didn't. But a HTTP proxy that is actively developed would be a plus only if either 1) There was features that were still not implemented that you desired or 2) There were some bugs that you wanted to fixed. or 3) There is a change regarding how HTTP works that would render proxomitron useless. None of which is true of Proxomitron
JayK: Seems like this topic hit a sore point with you. You like Proxomitron, I like it, peekaboo likes it--heck thousands like it. If you like it, use it. If you want to debase another product, be specific. People have different opinions about AVs, ATs, spyware, spam and many other programs. Use the one that's works best with you. I thought this forum was for the exchange of ideas. You don't like a product--then simply don't use it. Oh, and don't tell me why I would give a program a look. Chill dude. Regards, Gnostic PS--Just so the Mods know, this finishes this subject as far as I am concerned.
Well it seems that you are the one that needs to "chill". using words like "debasing". And do we really need a note to a "mod"? I have acted rudely, have we exchanged harsh words? Yes indeed that was what i was trying to do.But it seems to me you don't like hearing alternative opinions, hence this extreme reaction. Oh well, live and learn, next time I'll remember not to post in any thread started by you.
Agree, for the most part with your assessment. I just started testing Privoxy. Takes some getting use to, but I have been able to get into the Privoxy action files & default filter file (although they point you to only edit the user action file) to edit to my liking. Has a good help file to walk you thru changes. I particularly like the fact that you can debug in an automated type fashion using: http://config.privoxy.org/show-url-info but you can also manually edit the text files directly. Interested in your comment about speed though. I had to cut the filtering way back on my Win9x system. I was getting a 7 to 9 second delay prior to my editing out extraneous filtering. Seems like this may be a problem on other platforms (OSX) too from their forum: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=11118&atid=211118&func=detail&aid=726497 after cutting some of the BS filtering not needed since browser I'm testing takes care of most of privacy & security issues, it seems to run much faster. I did not know you could run proxo on Opera - I'll have to try it. p.s. I hate the fact that each time you reenter Privoxy does not remember your settings for the Log messages. Seems like that & activity animation should be turned off by default IMO. not sure at this point which is worse, unsupported proxo, or privoxy with long list of open unresolved issues all in all a good alternative
Some thoughts about the supposed advanatages of Privoxy. 1) Small footprint - Slightly larger then prxomitron on mine. 2) Easy to edit - You must be kidding. Long text files that i have to scroll down to edit using some geeky thing..makes me long for the bypass,allow cookies,allow images,allow js etc files of proxomitron. 3)http://config.privoxy.org/toggle - can you say privacy concerns? Nuff said.
You misinterpreted my post. I never said the things I listed were advantages over Proxo. If I had you would have seen comparative language (i.e. easier). Your #2 is not an issue for me. Good point on #3. For me not an issue since I have not added anything to the default configs (I am taking away not adding). But good to keep in mind that one is working through their server (potential privacy issue). Another potential rant from me on Privoxy: although you can configure to work on https: it doesn't seem to fully work on this linked test, unless the test is pulling my OS from somewhere other than user agent (I need to look at this some more): https://testzone.secunia.com/browser_checker/ and as posted above: p.s. I hate the fact that each time you reenter Privoxy does not remember your settings for the Log messages. Seems like that & activity animation should be turned off by default IMO. not sure at this point which is worse, unsupported proxo, or privoxy with long list of open unresolved issues all in all a good (potential) (almost there but for the misses I mentioned) alternative <--- I still prefer Proxo to Privoxy, and now that I know it works with Opera, I am customizing Proxo to cover for me in Opera what Adshield was doing in for me in IE. Speed test goes to Proxo hands down faster than Privoxy
For those interested in Privoxy, I accidentally stumbled on to the controls for animation, and Log messages. Shut down privoxy if you have it running. In your folder under Program Files for Privoxy, go into config.txt (you may want to make a copy of the original 1st), you can edit these controls. close to the bottom of this file just uncomment (take away the # sign) the line for animation and change the 1 to a 0 and do the same for log messages when you are done it will look like the snap shot below. just save the edited config.txt file and close the file. When you start Privoxy up again both the logging and animation will be turn off. You can turn it on again manually, but the defualt config will be off. I may look into the https: exception I cited in my previous post, out of curiosity but that's it for me on Privoxy, for now. Proxomitron is my preferred local proxy. (Scott you still da man where ever you are - thank you for this great program)
