Post Reply 
So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Apr. 08, 2010, 05:55 PM (This post was last modified: Apr. 08, 2010 05:56 PM by Toppy.)
Post: #1
So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Hi,

Did I miss something, have you guys found out about another local proxy you use or are messing with ? And if so, please tell us about it.

Where are the help requests, the tips, the helpful admissions of countless proxy loving people here, Sidki, no more updates. Nothing. It looks like Proxo is dying out, please what happened ?Sad
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 08, 2010, 11:21 PM
Post: #2
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
were around...there just nothing happening around...the current filter set just works fine!

I think sidki has a alpha set for his new filterset been tested right now..
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 09, 2010, 11:41 AM (This post was last modified: Apr. 09, 2010 11:55 AM by Ralph.)
Post: #3
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
I've been wondering about the same thing . Very quite here , for months . I usually pop in daily and very little activity . That said , Proxomitron with Sidke's latest filters are working perfectly for me in Win 7 32 bit . On my 64bit machine I am using the german version of Proxo and that is also outstanding . I hope things pick up here . Come on back Kye-u , JJoe , Sidke , and my old friend Oddysey ! Oh jeez , I almost forgot and of course ProxRocks !!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 09, 2010, 12:18 PM
Post: #4
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
i'm still here DAILY, believe it or not...
but yes, things have been slow...

i recall sidki posting that there would be an update "early this year", haven't heard anything recent on it, sadly...
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 19, 2010, 05:58 PM (This post was last modified: Apr. 19, 2010 05:58 PM by Kye-U.)
Post: #5
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
I'm still around (paying the domain/hosting bills and ensuring the forum is running smoothly and is up-to-date Wink); sadly very busy with school, work and my extra-curriculars.
Visit this user's website
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 21, 2010, 08:26 PM
Post: #6
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
I still check in here weekly, my sidki config is working perfectly so nothing to complain about.Wink
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 27, 2010, 05:45 PM
Post: #7
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Ralph,

If it weren't you, ol' buddy, I'd stay out of this.... but seeing as how it is you..... Wink

I've had to curtail my on-line activities, due to my health and all that. (It's really a matter of life and death - the other half says that if I don't get my nose out that damned computer screen, she'll kill me! Sad)

~!~!~!~!~!~
Toppy,

I think what we're seeing here is not a malaise so much as proof of the concept that Scott wrote The Proxomitron to be capable of doing whatever the user wants. And it is my firm belief that until the whole Internet changes standards, away from HTTP, then Proxo is going to continue doing what it's supposed to do, and do it quite well, TYVM.

There is another way to look at it, and that is that many of the websites we Proxo users visit are no longer changing their mindsets drastically so often. This translates to no real need to write a new filter, nor to update those that are already working as desired.

And of course, these doldrums have occured before in the life of this Forum, as our Fearless Leader will attest. It's always a cycle, and soon enough, a raft of new users will show up, and the traffic will pick up commensurately.

Take care, all!




Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 27, 2010, 10:14 PM
Post: #8
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
(Apr. 27, 2010 05:45 PM)Oddysey Wrote:  I think what we're seeing here is not a malaise so much as proof of the concept that Scott wrote The Proxomitron to be capable of doing whatever the user wants. And it is my firm belief that until the whole Internet changes standards, away from HTTP, then Proxo is going to continue doing what it's supposed to do, and do it quite well, TYVM.

It has no ipv6 support Smile! Then again sidki said he will run dual stack mode until they switch off ipv4 lol
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 29, 2010, 05:42 PM
Post: #9
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
bugger,

I suspect that Proxo isn't the only program that's "limited" to IP4. I strongly believe that when IP6 becomes somewhat more popular, many programmers will have a field day writing "stack interpreters" for backwards compatibility.

Only if HTTP goes away will Proxo finally be put to rest. Well, I suppose an interpreter or translator could be written, but that's got to be a pretty tall order. At that point, I think someone else will come up with a new "local proxy" program. Hopefully it would be backwards compatible with Proxo's filter sets.Whistling



Oddysey

I'm no longer in the rat race - the rats won't have me!
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 29, 2010, 10:08 PM
Post: #10
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
(Apr. 29, 2010 05:42 PM)Oddysey Wrote:  I suspect that Proxo isn't the only program that's "limited" to IP4.

Nope, not by a long shot. I keep hoping what will happen is that ISP's will have to give back their IPV4, leaving most of them for real servers. Then the ISP can do the IPV6/IPV4 translations transparently. That would leave their individual customers without a unique IPV4, which I think would be wonderful. If my network coulld only be seen externally via IPV6, those foreigners who poke & probe my router hundreds of times per day might have a harder time.

I'll be happy as long as I can get to web servers with IPV4 from here.

(Apr. 29, 2010 05:42 PM)Oddysey Wrote:  At that point, I think someone else will come up with a new "local proxy" program. Hopefully it would be backwards compatible with Proxo's filter sets.

I've tried several times and always fail to understand Proxo's filter language. So my proxy won't be compatible. If you'd like I can post some samples of my methods. They're definitely easier to understand, generally with a more step-by-step approach, and at least as capable.

Regardless, I think Proxo will still be usable for a long time.
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Apr. 30, 2010, 02:05 AM
Post: #11
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Proxomodo supports ipv6, but nobody has ever tested it yet! So lets say it suppose to support ipv6 Big Teeth
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
May. 07, 2010, 01:27 AM
Post: #12
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Folks will be showing up here because of Google's changes today that are not just for some Fx users but are universal now. Folks hate the changes.

On all browsers I now see the crap on the left on the search page (used to just get that on Fx) and I get the new search bar, font and bolded search text. Plus, on Opera 10.53 and 1010 I don't see the sponsored links on the right on the results page. However, on Fx 3.0 on Vista Ultimate on a virtual machine (I don't have later version) I now see sponsored links that Proxo is not filtering. I also have a very old version of Fx on my host computer (where I have Opera as default) and I see the sponsored links there also. Maybe they are blocked on Fx 3.6?

I don't use Sidki's Google filters that change the background, etc. to blue but I use all the other Google filters and that crap on the left on a search page has got to go! I mostly use Scroogle now so it doesn't matter too much to me about the Google changes but I still would like a filter to kill that crap on the left on the results page. Plus, I can't tell all the unhappy posters at dslreports to get Proxo to block the new Google search stuff because currently it is not filtering it. Scroogle, I would like a filter to toggle off/on all Google diatribe on their search page. I have read almost all of it and some of it really gets too in your face especially if you have read it already.

As for IPv6...I hadn't really thought about how that will affect Proxo! Geez!!!! My ISP is going migrate the end of THIS YEAR or BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR all of us residential Road Runner cable broadband users to IPv6.


Attached File(s)
.png  Thursday, May 06, 2010 15.png (Size: 130.05 KB / Downloads: 493)
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
May. 08, 2010, 04:31 AM (This post was last modified: May. 08, 2010 04:31 AM by JJoe.)
Post: #13
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
(Apr. 29, 2010 10:08 PM)Graycode Wrote:  I've tried several times and always fail to understand Proxo's filter language.


Any idea why?

For the current google problem
I added (a temporary solution)

Code:
[HTTP headers]
In = FALSE
Out = TRUE
Key = "! : JUMP: Old Google (2010.05.07) (Out)"
URL = "[^/]++.google.[^/]+/[a-z]+\?q=&(^*\&hl=all)\1&$JUMP(http://\1\&hl=all)"
to the header filters

OR

Code:
[^/]++.google.[^/]+/[a-z]+\?q=&(^*\&hl=all)\1&$JUMP(http://\1\&hl=all)
to Exceptions-U or equivalent.

Do you follow?

(Apr. 29, 2010 10:08 PM)Graycode Wrote:  If you'd like I can post some samples of my methods. They're definitely easier to understand, generally with a more step-by-step approach, and at least as capable.

If you have the time and desire, I'm interested. It can wait till I have more time and brains tho.

Probably back on Monday.
Traveling Saturday

Have fun all
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
May. 08, 2010, 10:56 PM (This post was last modified: May. 08, 2010 11:26 PM by Graycode.)
Post: #14
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
(May. 08, 2010 04:31 AM)JJoe Wrote:  
(Apr. 29, 2010 10:08 PM)Graycode Wrote:  I've tried several times and always fail to understand Proxo's filter language.

Any idea why?

I get lost trying to figure out what the detail intended changes are, especially when looking at the huge RegEx-like things that you guys are able to put together. Then as a developer my mind can not conceive of how to make sense of the Proxo "language" to accomplish a complex series of actions.

(May. 08, 2010 04:31 AM)JJoe Wrote:  
(Apr. 29, 2010 10:08 PM)Graycode Wrote:  If you'd like I can post some samples of my methods. They're definitely easier to understand, generally with a more step-by-step approach, and at least as capable.

If you have the time and desire, I'm interested. It can wait till I have more time and brains tho.

Today I have the desire, thanks for asking & have a great trip. Attached is a text file containing a few sample filters. I've added some comments (they start with '#' token) to describe what the methods are doing.

For me a "Filter" consists of various applicability constraints, rules for operational issues (like buffer size), and one or more "Action Sets" that define what to do. Filters and even individual actions within each filter can be named and enabled/disabled.

Indentation (if any) is irrelevant except for human readability. Matching quotes are used when specification parts contain white-space. Some commands and other options are not shown in this sample. Data manipulation is done in waves of buffers, the full content is not accumulated unless all of it happens to fit into the buffer size being used for it. I often prefer to blank out some region rather than remove those bytes by moving the remainder up in the buffer. Speed & efficency were important objectives.

Prior to filtering, any chunked, gzip, UTF, etc. encodings have already been accounted for, and their reverse encoding would be done later after content may have been modified. When UTF-16 or 32 is detected, the filters are always working with UTF-8 data.

Incredible things can be done -- but (I think) better done with a step-by-step precise approach.

To Everyone: These are NOT Proxo Filters! They relate to a completely different (and not currently available) package.


Attached File(s)
.txt  PX_Sample_Filters.txt (Size: 6.57 KB / Downloads: 558)
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
May. 10, 2010, 08:25 AM
Post: #15
RE: So quiet around Proxomitron ?
Interesting filter language, the syntax seems more readable for human being. It took me longer time to translate those action steps to what they finally do. It might be because I have used Proxomitron long time and its language seems more understandable to me. However, for complex action, your language should win on readability. So far I still couldn't understand many of sidki's filter... Banging Head

It's great that your program could handle nested tags. The byte pointer like BF1+7 and BF1-300 seems powerful too.

Does it support block file? Does it filter http headers?

Besides the fitler language, could you show us more features? Especially those Proxomitron could not do...
Add Thank You Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump: