Squid Proxy Cache Server with Web Console and Directory Authentication

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is that we have machines behind an internet firewall which do not have access to the internet. The only way these machines can access anything outside, for example, Java packages or Maven packages, is via Squid Proxy Cache Server. These machines are called air-gapped servers, and air-gapped servers do not have access to the internet. If they do not have access to the internet but still want to access the internet, then Squid Proxy Cache Server is a good way to connect to the internet and download those packages. Currently, we are using it as a security tool. Not every machine needs to connect to the internet. Only a handful of machines need to connect, or in this case, Squid Proxy Cache Server needs to connect to the internet.

Although Squid Proxy Cache Server was earlier used in a pre-internet environment where not every machine was connected to the internet, it is still surviving now because it is the only mechanism where we can emulate firewalling. Not every machine needs to connect to the internet. Our product is based out of a data center, so machines go via Squid Proxy Cache Server. Unique scenarios or challenges include having to enable something called ACLs. Most people just install Squid Proxy Cache Server and think that it is all done, but there is a specific Access Control List that you have to enable so all servers or your subnet will start accessing Squid Proxy Cache Server. If you do not enable this, then the machines will not get access to the internet.

In our case, we only use it for Maven proxy servers or Maven cache. We use the Maven cache after Squid Proxy Cache Server. So, any application that needs a Java package comes to the Maven cache server, then it goes to Squid Proxy Cache Server, and then it goes to the internet. We are limiting what we are allowing through the proxy.

The best features Squid Proxy Cache Server offers in my experience include how easy it is to install and configure. It has been available for almost every Linux distribution for the last twenty to thirty years. Although these days it is not as widely used as other networking tools, the advantage that it gives is that not every machine needs to have access to the internet. Another part that I really appreciate about it is the logs. The logs allow you to see what every machine is accessing. I think that is one of the best features of Squid Proxy Cache Server. You can actually see if a request is going to a particular domain and what is being served by Squid Proxy Cache Server. The only limitation there is that HTTPS traffic cannot be decrypted. Anything that happens inside an HTTPS tunnel is not shown to Squid Proxy Cache Server, which is appropriate security and how HTTPS was supposed to work.

One of the features that I find useful in Squid Proxy Cache Server is that you can host multiple Squid Proxy Cache Server instances behind a load balancer, and you can have a cache mechanism. You can have a parent domain hierarchy in Squid Proxy Cache Server. If the child is not able to find a certain website, it goes to the parent. Those things are also available in Squid Proxy Cache Server, though they are rarely used today. You can chain Squid Proxy Cache Server instances together to create one more cache and have busy servers and less busy servers. There is something called a cache miss and a cache hit. A good proxy server has a higher number of cache hits and a lower number of cache misses. All those things are very well documented inside the logs as well. That is another unique feature of Squid Proxy Cache Server.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization because, as I mentioned, I do not have to enable internet access for each and every machine. They have to go via Squid Proxy Cache Server. So that has increased my security bar for the network. This approach has led to more peace of mind and best practices. Only one server has to access the internet. On the firewall, you have to allow only Squid Proxy Cache Server. The rest are all clients to that Squid Proxy Cache Server. So that takes care of your major security headache.

I cannot think of how Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved. It has everything built-in, from Active Directory integration to centralized logging. It has been a proxy cache server for so many years. I do not think you can perfect it anymore or that there is any more work left. It is the de facto proxy server for a reason.

If I had to add more about needed improvements for Squid Proxy Cache Server, a UI built on top of Squid Proxy Cache Server where I can see the logs in real-time would be great, but it is not really a priority for anyone. You can have Squid Proxy Cache Server logs going to a syslog or a Splunk server and then you can see it in real-time. You really do not need to worry about it. Another good feature would be if the logs could be in JSON format. Then Elasticsearch, Splunk, and everyone could parse it easily.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server ever since two thousand three or ever since I started my career. In earlier days, it was used as a caching and an HTTP proxy. We used to have only a very few machines that were connected to the internet. Unlike these days where every laptop is connected to the internet, in earlier days, only a few machines used to connect to the internet, and that internet was via Squid Proxy Cache Server. We have been using it for almost twenty years now.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is one hundred percent stable.

Regarding Squid Proxy Cache Server's scalability, you can have a parent and a child Squid Proxy Cache Server instances, or you can put Squid Proxy Cache Server behind a load balancer. Depending on how you want to do it, it is all available for you.

The customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server is not needed because it is an open-source product. You do not need customer care support for Squid Proxy Cache Server. If you know how to run most open-source products, this is the product. If you can run Linux and install packages on Linux, this is a good way to go. There is no support needed. There is an open-source community available on the internet, or the manual pages themselves are very helpful.

I previously used a different solution before Squid Proxy Cache Server, where all machines were connecting to the internet.

My experience with Squid Proxy Cache Server regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is an open-source product. There is no pricing, setup cost, or licensing cost. You use it and if you do not want it, you shut it down. It is as easy as that. Using Squid Proxy Cache Server is as easy as using Linux.

Before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, I evaluated other options such as SSHD as a SOCKS server and Apache as a proxy server. But those are very hard to configure. Squid Proxy Cache Server is the de facto proxy cache server. I do not need to explain much. If you just search for "proxy server," you are most probably going to find that Squid Proxy Cache Server is the right one.

I use the logs from Squid Proxy Cache Server only for troubleshooting. For example, why is a certain IP address not able to get a certain package or what is a certain IP address doing? The logs are mostly in an access log format and it is very easy to read and see what each and every machine is trying to access.

I rate Squid Proxy Cache Server a nine out of ten.

I rate it a nine because I do not think any software is ten out of ten. Every software has a chance to improve. No software is perfect.

Integrating AI with Squid Proxy Cache Server is a really great ask and would be a great feature.

Regarding Squid Proxy Cache Server's AI capabilities, it just works out of the box. You do not have to worry too much about it. It has sensible defaults inside it. You just have to tweak those sensible defaults if you are having high traffic.

My advice to others looking into using Squid Proxy Cache Server is to go ahead and install it. The sensible defaults will take care of most of the security items. You really do not have to worry about it.

For twenty-three years, I thought I would not be using Squid Proxy Cache Server. I thought the days of Squid Proxy Cache Server were dead, obsolete, and that it was not needed. But it does serve its purpose in today's age as well.

In my career, I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for almost five years. I was working in a news channel in media before two years ago. When I was there, we deployed Squid Proxy Cache Server for media-related pictures and file-related contents.

We use Squid Proxy Cache Server primarily to secure our network. No device, no user, and no desktop is allowed to use the internet bypassing the proxy. This is all about the forward proxy. The first thing in our mind at that time was to secure our network when our devices and users connect to the internet. We introduced Squid Proxy for that to minimize security risks. We also used it for the reverse proxy to mitigate incoming attacks when someone visits websites and other services. The traffic connects directly to our servers and passes through our reverse proxy server. Secondly, we planned to have a cache to speed up our productivity between servers and user data, so we also configured caching settings in the proxy server, which provides a great benefit to productivity by saving bandwidth.

What I appreciate the most about Squid Proxy Cache Server is that both of its features are very beneficial for any IT company, whether it should be a media company, a finance company, or any other sector. This offers the benefit and the secure option that no employee or user should go directly to the internet. It is very useful to use a proxy server and securely connect to the internet because the forward proxy always saves you. Any user connecting from internally is protected from outside attacks since we are using a forward proxy server.

For Squid Proxy Cache Server, we use it primarily to secure our network. No device, no user, and no desktop is allowed to use the internet bypassing the proxy. The first thing in our mind at that time was to secure our network when our devices and users connect to the internet. We introduced Squid Proxy for that to minimize security risks. We also used it for the reverse proxy to mitigate incoming attacks when someone visits websites and other services. The traffic connects directly to our servers and passes through our reverse proxy server. Secondly, we planned to have a cache to speed up our productivity between servers and user data, so we also configured caching settings in the proxy server, which provides a great benefit to productivity by saving bandwidth.

As for what I dislike about Squid Proxy Cache Server, there is nothing specifically to dislike. However, currently, we are using Fortinet and Sophos firewalls, which have built-in proxy servers. I have seen that they are enriched in security, with maximized security levels featuring DLP, IPS, IDS, and SSL inspection. They come with various security features, and thus, the security is a bit higher in these products.

As of right now, Squid Proxy Cache Server does not have this sort of security, so I would like to see better security in Squid Proxy Cache Server. I think Squid Proxy Cache Server is an open-source server. At that time, we had not deployed those features, but I think you can have them in Squid Proxy Cache Server too.

To make Squid Proxy Cache Server better, we can integrate some other products that introduce security. We can enrich the firewall and enhance SE Linux and file-level control. We can introduce SSL inspection and create or deploy IPS and some DLP-related features into it. If it remains open source, all those improvements will be much better.

In my career, I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for almost five years.

Regarding stability, it was very good. We did not face any kind of crash or network failure issue. Once in a blue moon, we have faced an issue related to cache, as users and device owners complained about the network not working. We checked the proxy server, and the cache server was not working properly because it had reached its maximum capacity. After clearing and purging it, it started to work well again.

In terms of scalability, Squid Proxy Cache Server is always scalable as much as you want. If you have deployed it behind a SAN storage device, you can maximize its capacity. If you notice trouble related to RAM, CPU, or storage size, you can scale it as much as you want.

There was not any sort of technical support for Squid Proxy Cache Server when we were using it. We did not have any technical support or any SLA from any company. We were managing it on our own, and it was totally open-source.

The deployment of Squid Proxy Cache Server is easy and very enjoyable.

I have used an alternative, and the deployment of Squid Proxy Cache Server is easy and very enjoyable.

I would rate Squid Proxy Cache Server a seven out of ten overall, considering its working, scalability, and durability. The scalability and reliability worked well for Squid Proxy Cache Server, so I would rate it an eight out of ten. However, I would rate it a little lower in security because it does not come with the required security features. I give Squid Proxy Cache Server an overall rating of seven out of ten.

I completed one project with my virtual lab using Squid Proxy Cache Server. I started using Squid Proxy Cache Server approximately four months ago, in April or March. I created a virtual lab with a virtual company that has users, and I used Squid Proxy Cache Server to block them from entering certain internet websites. The main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server was to control web access. I chose Squid Proxy Cache Server because it is open source and free, which are the features I appreciate most about it.

The overall main benefits I experienced from using Squid Proxy Cache Server are the ability to control employee web browsing. I can manage which websites employees are permitted to access. This prevents them from consuming excessive bandwidth on the company network.

The configuration of Squid Proxy Cache Server was somewhat difficult for someone new to the product. I received assistance from AI during setup, but a new user would find it challenging.

When dealing with websites that use SSL, you need to create a CA certificate and install it on every device in your company to experience the full benefits of the configuration process.

The setup process is complex for someone new to Squid Proxy Cache Server.

I started using Squid Proxy Cache Server approximately four months ago, in April or March.

I did not experience any stability or performance issues. Squid Proxy Cache Server worked perfectly, and the users in my virtual lab could not access restricted sites, so it performed its job as intended.

I did not attempt to scale Squid Proxy Cache Server.

I was not aware of the technical support team or the process for escalating questions because this was only a virtual lab for training purposes.

I did not use a different proxy product prior to Squid Proxy Cache Server.

Installing Squid Proxy Cache Server was very easy. I used it for free for training purposes. I implemented it as a package with pfSense during the initial setup process.

I received help and had assistance during setup.

I did not evaluate any other solutions.

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server was during the time when I was using pfSense, so I set up a configuration that was very important for me to have Squid Proxy configured.

I used Squid Proxy Cache Server mainly for site blocking to provide complete security coverage, which helped me deal with the issue of access and analysis of different clients within the company, and I used it daily within a scenario together with pfSense.

At the time I used Squid Proxy Cache Server, it was implemented on a local network consisting of a physical machine that had several Docker containers, and inside it, pfSense handled all the ACL control together with Squid Proxy Cache Server.

The features such as the block list via ACL and log recording made my work easier by allowing employees to have better quality of performance in terms of blocking, which helped people stay more focused and integrated in what they had to do without getting distracted by sites or networks they should not access.

I have been working in my field for more than 15 years. I used Squid Proxy Cache Server for approximately 5 to 7 years, though I am not using it lately. My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server was when I used pfSense, and it was very important for me to have Squid Proxy configured. I mainly used it for website blocking to provide full security coverage, particularly focusing on the matter of accesses and analysis of different clients within the company, and I used it daily within a scenario together with pfSense.

Squid Proxy Cache Server had a positive impact on my organization by being the main factor helping with productivity. By doing this control and handling the quality of accesses, the quality and performance of the staff got much better.

I think the best features that Squid Proxy Cache Server offers are the block list via ACL, which helps a lot, the basic installation with pfSense that I used frequently, and the interesting log records, which are very helpful for us. The features such as the block list via ACL and log recording made our work easier by helping to ensure that employees had better quality of performance in terms of blocking, so people stay more focused and more engaged in what they have to do and do not get distracted with sites or networks they should not be accessing.

In my opinion, Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved by covering more issues, having more updates, and providing a slightly more updated version of lists and logs and information that we can distribute to other places for a more complete monitoring of it.

I have been working in my field for more than 15 years.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is stable in my experience.

In my opinion, the scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server is very good.

I did not previously use a different solution before Squid Proxy Cache Server.

When I chose Squid Proxy Cache Server, I did not evaluate other options because it came up first during my research, and I already had the integration, which made it much easier to use.

At the time when I used Squid Proxy Cache Server, it was implemented on a local network, on a machine that had several Docker containers, and inside it, there was pfSense which handled all the ACL control along with Squid Proxy Cache Server.

I did not observe any practical result in terms of monetary values after implementing Squid Proxy Cache Server because I always used it as open source, together with pfSense, which is also open source. Everything was configured manually, and I did not have much improvement in terms of cost because there were none.

I think the best features that Squid Proxy Cache Server offers are the block list via ACL, which helps a lot, the basic installation with pfSense that I used frequently, and the interesting log records, which are very helpful for us. My advice to other people thinking about using Squid Proxy Cache Server is that you can use it because it is worth it. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.