SSH with CopSSH and Win 7 shows unusual Tunnel Behavior

  • Follow


Per the subject, I was setting up CopSSH under Win 7 for the first
time, and it installed fine. I then went to connect from another
machine using Putty, and was getting timeouts. Went into Windows
Firewall and setup an inbound rule and an outbound rule to open Port
22 (evidently that no longer happens automatically), and Putty then
connected appropriately.

I then setup the Tunnel option using Dynamic 1081, and set Firefox to
use that as it's proxy. I can tell Firefox is using it properly
because if it's not up and running I get the message about the Proxy
Server being offline. However, when it IS using it, I can see that the
DNS is being resolved (i.e. I can navigate), but the pages always come
up blank.

Any ideas?
0
Reply ewan.grantham (2) 12/10/2009 1:17:52 PM

EwanG <ewan.grantham@gmail.com> writes:
> I then setup the Tunnel option using Dynamic 1081, and set Firefox to
> use that as it's proxy.

A tunnel is not a proxy, although it can be a tunnel *to* a proxy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no
0
Reply utf 12/10/2009 1:38:18 PM


On Dec 10, 8:38=A0am, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <d...@des.no> wrote:
> EwanG <ewan.grant...@gmail.com> writes:
> > I then setup the Tunnel option using Dynamic 1081, and set Firefox to
> > use that as it's proxy.
>
> A tunnel is not a proxy, although it can be a tunnel *to* a proxy.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server
>
> DES
> --
> Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - d...@des.no

OK... but this has worked before. So, why isn't it working now?
0
Reply EwanG 12/11/2009 12:33:30 PM

EwanG <ewan.grantham@gmail.com> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> writes:
> > EwanG <ewan.grantham@gmail.com> writes:
> > > I then setup the Tunnel option using Dynamic 1081, and set Firefox to
> > > use that as it's proxy.
> > A tunnel is not a proxy, although it can be a tunnel *to* a proxy.
> OK... but this has worked before.

I doubt it.

> So, why isn't it working now?

Hard to tell, you didn't describe either setup in much detail.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no
0
Reply utf 12/11/2009 12:36:01 PM

On Dec 11, 6:36=A0am, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <d...@des.no> wrote:
> EwanG <ewan.grant...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <d...@des.no> writes:
> > > EwanG <ewan.grant...@gmail.com> writes:
> > > > I then setup the Tunnel option using Dynamic 1081, and set Firefox =
to
> > > > use that as it's proxy.
> > > A tunnel is not a proxy, although it can be a tunnel *to* a proxy.
> > OK... but this has worked before.
>
> I doubt it.
>
> > So, why isn't it working now?
>
> Hard to tell, you didn't describe either setup in much detail.
>
> DES
> --
> Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - d...@des.no

What logs or other information would be helpful? I setup CopSSH
following it's default install, confirmed that the service was
running, manually unblocked port 22 for inbound and outbound
communications, and setup my user to be able to login. On the client
machine I set up Putty, used the tunnel option to specify D1081, and
can login to the CopSSH machine just fine, leaving a terminal window
open to make sure it isn't dropping the connection. On the client
machine I then setup Firefox to use port 1081, and to have it use the
remote DNS to satisfy DNS requests. In the past, that was all I had to
do to get a working connection. Is there something else I'm missing?
0
Reply EwanG 12/13/2009 12:37:49 AM

OK, got it figured out. As I mentioned earlier, I had to hand open
Port 22, which is something CopSSH had done automatically previously.
Well it turns out that on the client machine I had to hand open Port
1081 to inbound and outbound also. I also had to make sure that I had
the 127.0.0.1, 1081 proxy specified ONLY under the Socks 5 option in
Firefox. Once I had that done, everything started working again.

I think where Dag-Erling was getting confused is that OpenSSH has a
built-in Socks 5 proxy, and so he was thinking I was asking why just
setting up an SSH client and server wouldn't work as a proxy - which
indeed would NOT be enough.

FWIW...
0
Reply EwanG 12/14/2009 1:51:05 AM

5 Replies
545 Views

(page loaded in 0.918 seconds)

Similiar Articles:




7/13/2012 6:15:49 PM


Reply: