If you use it with Putty using the 'D 1080' option the
combination acts much as a distributed SOCKS proxy,
receiving all packets on the local port 1080, and squirting
them out at the remote server aimed at their original IP and
port. The transmission between client and server is of
course via a port of your choosing (default port 22) and
encrypted. Obviously your network accessing programs
(Netscape etc) need to be told to use a SOCKS proxy, or you
need to use ProxyCap or SocksCap to modify internet calls
from programs which can't easily be configured for access
via SOCKS.
There are some tiny snags, like I can't access the web
configuration page of my router this way (which requires a
password) and I still have to forward ports to my Ultr@VNC
server even when I access it over a tunelled port 22, but in
general it works well.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If you use it with Putty using the 'D 1080' option the
combination acts much as a distributed SOCKS proxy,
receiving all packets on the local port 1080, and squirting
them out at the remote server aimed at their original IP and
port. The transmission between client and server is of
course via a port of your choosing (default port 22) and
encrypted. Obviously your network accessing programs
(Netscape etc) need to be told to use a SOCKS proxy, or you
need to use ProxyCap or SocksCap to modify internet calls
from programs which can't easily be configured for access
via SOCKS.
There are some tiny snags, like I can't access the web
configuration page of my router this way (which requires a
password) and I still have to forward ports to my Ultr@VNC
server which I would expect not to need since all the
traffic should be going via SSH port 22. But apart from that
it's fine.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Logged In: NO
If you use it with Putty using the 'D 1080' option the
combination acts much as a distributed SOCKS proxy,
receiving all packets on the local port 1080, and squirting
them out at the remote server aimed at their original IP and
port. The transmission between client and server is of
course via a port of your choosing (default port 22) and
encrypted. Obviously your network accessing programs
(Netscape etc) need to be told to use a SOCKS proxy, or you
need to use ProxyCap or SocksCap to modify internet calls
from programs which can't easily be configured for access
via SOCKS.
There are some tiny snags, like I can't access the web
configuration page of my router this way (which requires a
password) and I still have to forward ports to my Ultr@VNC
server even when I access it over a tunelled port 22, but in
general it works well.
Logged In: YES
user_id=1134867
If you use it with Putty using the 'D 1080' option the
combination acts much as a distributed SOCKS proxy,
receiving all packets on the local port 1080, and squirting
them out at the remote server aimed at their original IP and
port. The transmission between client and server is of
course via a port of your choosing (default port 22) and
encrypted. Obviously your network accessing programs
(Netscape etc) need to be told to use a SOCKS proxy, or you
need to use ProxyCap or SocksCap to modify internet calls
from programs which can't easily be configured for access
via SOCKS.
There are some tiny snags, like I can't access the web
configuration page of my router this way (which requires a
password) and I still have to forward ports to my Ultr@VNC
server which I would expect not to need since all the
traffic should be going via SSH port 22. But apart from that
it's fine.