How would connection between stunnel and server through proxy work? To verify servers identity, stunnel needs to receive and verify servers certificate and since servers address is defined in config file, anything that modifies traffic between stunnel and server will be seen as mitm and that will break connectivity.
It might be possible to disable certificate verification, but in that case sslstrip would be better solution. (it would have the same security).

On December 9, 2018 3:30:34 PM EET, kovacs janos <[email protected]> wrote:
i mean a proxy that can work with the address of the actual website
opened in the browser, not just specific addresses defined in the
config file.

at least i thought thats what you meant with this:
"In case of client (browser), for each remote (https) server to be
connected to, stunnnel config file will need an entry;
in browser it will not be possible to use DNS names (all servers will
have to be addressed as 127.0.0.1:someport
where "someport", is port assigned in stunnel conf server entry accept
statement), so most links in webpages will not work."

if stunnel can only work with specified addresses, cant a proxy like
privoxy be set up at both ends, and stunnel only has to accept and
connect to the address of the proxies?

On 12/9/18, Yyy <[email protected]> wrote:
 What do you mean by dynamic address proxy?

 On December 8, 2018 12:39:26 AM EET, kovacs janos
 <[email protected]> wrote:
if stunnel can only accept from and forward to one address, cant that
be went around by setting a dynamic address proxy on both sides of
stunnel? like:
proxy - stunnel - proxy

although i havent been able to connect to even a single website, but i
didnt try with specifically the IP

On 12/7/18, yyy <[email protected]> wrote:

 ----- Original Message -----
 From: "kovacs janos" <[email protected]>
 To: "Flo Rance" <[email protected]>
 Cc: <[email protected]>
 Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 2:30 AM
 Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] older browsers, stunnel and privoxy


 now im really not sure, since the wikipedia page on stunnel also
 describes the program doing exactly what i need in the Example
 scenario section:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stunnel#Example_scenario

 "Network traffic from the client initially passes over SSL to the
 stunnel application, which transparently encrypts/decrypts traffic
and
 forwards unsecured traffic to port 25 locally. The mail server sees
a
 non-SSL mail client. "

 only difference is, i need it to forward "unsecured traffic" to my
 browser client, not a server. are you all sure its really not
 possible?

 It is possible with the same limitiations as with server case.
 In case of server, there is one server, which accepts incoming
connections
 (unencrypted) and stunnel accepts unencrypted
 connections for that (one) server and decrypts and forwards them.
There is
 only one server, which gets connected by stunnel.

 In case of client (browser), for each remote (https) server to be
connected
 to, stunnnel config file will need an entry;
 in browser it will not be possible to use DNS names (all servers will
have
 to be addressed as 127.0.0.1:someport
 where "someport", is port assigned in stunnel conf server entry
accept
 statement), so most links in webpages will not work.
 It may be feasible for small number of servers, which does not links
any
 external resources.


 stunnel-users mailing list
 [email protected]
 https://www.stunnel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/stunnel-users


 --
 Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.