Squid Proxy Cache Server Reviews

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is that it provides the proxy and also reverse proxy in some cases.

For a quick specific example of how I use Squid Proxy Cache Server as a proxy or reverse proxy in my operations, the forward proxy is basically just NATing so that I can access websites from a particular domain. While for the reverse proxy, it acts as the connectivity for the backend servers which are not exposed to the internet. That is how it is built.

As a reverse proxy, the reverse proxy is basically exposing the IMAP server so that all the mail servers' ports are exposed via the reverse proxy, which are distributed across multiple availability zones.

The best features that Squid Proxy Cache Server offers include a lot of caching functionality, which is the best part, and then it is the security. I can also provide clustering between the proxies as caching servers, so multiple Squid Proxy Cache Server instances can act as a load balancer and content cache.

Regarding caching functionality or clustering, in some cases, I am an Internet Service Provider. For a group of customers, it makes sense to have this cached on the server so that all the files which are more or less static stay in the cache. This speeds up or boosts the connectivity and the downloading functionality for any website visiting, so majorly, it's a performance booster.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization because first of all, it's an open-source thing, so I don't really have to do anything special to buy the license. It comes default with Red Hat, and that is how we install on the servers. In my previous company, we were installing it on Fedora and Ubuntu. It's completely free and open source. The functionality, such as allowing a group of people to access particular websites and blocking websites, are all interesting for us. Sometimes, the government asks us to block some website pages and some zones, so along with the DNS blocking, we also block the HTTP content.

I think Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved by having a nice front-end, one similar to Blue Coat for access management, view management, and direct configuration instead of doing it all through the CLI. It's best to have everything done through the GUI, which is what I think can improve the product.

I don't want to implement third-party GUIs on Squid Proxy Cache Server. So that's what would be on my wish list—that Squid Proxy Cache Server by itself provides a GUI, which will give more confidence to users.

I haven't actually used AI with Squid Proxy Cache Server, but I think it might be very interesting to have the AI capability built-in. However, I do think we need some GPU or something to boost the performance on Squid Proxy Cache Server as natively running. I think we need to add some GPU cards so that it works more natively with AI.

I don't have experience using AI features yet, but I think it would be great if it could do some live scanning of the websites that are getting blocked on a daily basis and perform some sampling analysis. Especially in the case of reverse proxy, if there are any attacks happening, it would be beneficial if it scrapes through its own log files and provides some nice dashboards showing where the attacks are coming from. That would be really great to have as a handy troubleshooting tool.

One more feature I would ask for is if AI can provide the best possible configuration and do a review of Squid Proxy Cache Server just to make sure that no other ports or anything by default are missed in configuration. It would also be great if the proxy server acts as a load balancer in a cluster mode that shares the cache, and the configuration is best set.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for more than four or five years.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is very stable.

The scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server is that it can be horizontally scaled; you don't always need vertical scaling. Instead of one instance, you can put it behind the load balancer so that it can serve a huge amount of customers.

Customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server comes from Red Hat, so that's good support for me with the premium support.

I previously used a different solution, specifically the Blue Coat proxy, which was end of life. With a lot of cost optimization, I switched to Squid Proxy Cache Server as a solution.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization because first of all, it's an open-source thing, so I don't really have to do anything special to buy the license. It comes default with Red Hat, and that is how we install on the servers. In my previous company, we were installing it on Fedora and Ubuntu. It's completely free and open source.

My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer; for example, we are not a partner or reseller.

I have seen a return on investment with Squid Proxy Cache Server because money is definitely saved. Also, the enterprise maintenance and having the hardware from the vendors, which is like a lock-in, makes it difficult to replace the hardware proxies nowadays, so it's interesting. If it's container-based, it can add further advantages.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that we use it with the Red Hat solution, so it was only the subscription model which I had to take for Red Hat for the enterprise support. That is how it is today. However, since it's open source, it's not backed by an enterprise. Nonetheless, Red Hat support is sufficient as premium support.

I have seen a cost saving since implementing Squid Proxy Cache Server because then I don't have to really go for something such as a Blue Coat proxy. Earlier, I was using a Blue Coat proxy, but later on, I turned to Squid Proxy Cache Server and the cost was reduced. It's very handy for operations, and also the caching has improved, so this is my use case.

Before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, I evaluated other options, including NGINX and the Apache solution.

I would advise others looking into using Squid Proxy Cache Server to focus on configuration optimization because there is huge potential when you do the optimization. The better you have configured Squid Proxy Cache Server, the very good potential it has for caching, security, and blocking break-ins. It's very nice. I give this product a rating of 8.

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 have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for nine years in my current company. Before that, I used it overseas from early 2008 to 2010, so I have approximately ten years of experience overall.

In our infrastructure, the main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is serving server-side internet connectivity rather than user connectivity. When a server needs to access the internet, it uses Squid Proxy to do so, and we implement ACLs on the Squid server as well.

For example, we recently built a Microsoft server that needs to access the internet to patch, update, and perform other functions, and this is where Squid Proxy Cache Server really helps my team. We gather the information of the server source IP and the destination they want to access, such as abc.microsoft.com or xyz.microsoft.com. Then we create ACLs in the Squid configuration file with source and destination lists, attach them with the policy, and that is how we use it.

We have hundreds of servers in our environment, and I add to their requirements daily. Each server's requirement with Squid Proxy Cache Server is different, as they want to access different sites. We strictly control them, and it works both ways. It is both cache and internet control, mostly internet control.

In our environment, we use Squid Proxy Cache Server to control server-side access to the internet. On top of that, caching is also a benefit because the same cache is used by other servers. We download images from Microsoft, and if they are in the cache, the next download will be faster.

I have experience with Cyberoam as well, which also uses Squid as a caching server. Proxy servers have two components: one is caching, and another is internet access or URL database. The content or destination that has already been used can be saved in the cache. This is the best feature: cache in and cache out.

I used Squid Proxy Cache Server in my previous organization with delay pools to control bandwidth. We reviewed our MRTG or Cacti graphs before and after implementation, and after that implementation, we saw around twenty to twenty-five percent of internet traffic saved.

It is very difficult for us to determine if the twenty to twenty-five percent savings is from caching or from internet control. However, what we found is that before implementing Squid, we had around one hundred Mbps bandwidth utilization on average. I cannot remember the exact figures, but after that implementation, we found around seventy to eighty percent of internet utilization according to the graphs, while the user base and everything else remained the same. There was no degradation or employee shortage. Everything was as usual. Therefore, we feel that we saved around twenty percent bandwidth.

I did not use the AI capabilities of Squid Proxy Cache Server, but everything is moving toward AI. There should be some AI capabilities so that we can use delay pools or bandwidth quotas, and based on that, there should be auto-scaling. If the quota is filled, then additional chunks should be added to the quota automatically.

I would rate it ten if we had a dashboard or visible interface with Squid Proxy Cache Server. Because we are using third-party tools such as Cacti and MRTG to see utilization, and other third-party monitoring tools, there should be built-in tools in Squid so that we can measure performance and see results. If that were available, I would give it a ten.

I have not encountered any stability issues with Squid Proxy Cache Server so far. It is stable.

In our environment, we implemented scaling differently with Squid Proxy Cache Server. We did not implement anything inside Squid for scaling. Instead, we placed a load balancer in front of Squid Proxy, and when anything requires scaling, we simply add a new Squid Proxy behind the F5 load balancer. That is how we handle scaling. However, I believe there should be automatic scaling with AI. I have not tried that.

We never used the Webmin GUI for Squid Proxy Cache Server, but for a Linux expert, it is easy to control from the command line. I never have experience using the GUI. I have rarely used Webmin, but I did not discover how Webmin is useful. There should be a GUI interface or UI so that administrators can control it more easily.

I always thought Squid Proxy Cache Server is open source, so I never considered that there should be support. However, it would be great to have support similar to Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Before it was open source, but later it became enterprise. Currently, I do not know if there is a professional support team available for Squid Proxy Cache Server, but it would be helpful.

So far, we have not needed to reach out for help regarding support for Squid Proxy Cache Server.

Before, we used Blue Coat Proxy, Cyberoam Proxy, Forcepoint, and other solutions. The reason we switched to Squid Proxy Cache Server is cost. Those professional proxy solutions have huge yearly cost involvement, and currently with Squid Proxy Cache Server, we are using it at no cost.

We evaluated a few solutions: Blue Coat, Cyberoam, and Squid, mostly these three. We found that Squid is the lowest-cost option. We also tried Forcepoint. We put Forcepoint, Blue Coat, Cyberoam, and Squid into a matrix and table, and based on all those factors, we found that Squid is good in terms of cost. We also conducted research and found that everybody uses Squid as their backend caching solution.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is deployed on-premises in our organization. We have approximately six Squid Proxy Linux machines, and we have an F5 load balancer that controls those six Squid Proxies. High availability can also be implemented, but we have not tried that.

I do not have specific data regarding return on investment with Squid Proxy Cache Server. However, in general, I feel it is useful. Mostly, I do not see any cost involved except for the hardware cost.

For our environment, we are using the free open source Squid Proxy Cache Server, so there is no licensing cost. Our only cost is for hardware, such as the Linux machine. In terms of costing, we do not feel much impact. It is very minimal.

I advise others looking into using Squid Proxy Cache Server that if they are proficient in Linux and have a good Linux administrator, they should go for it.

Everything is good regarding Squid Proxy Cache Server. I would just advise that there should be a professional web interface for Squid so that we can see the consumption of the proxy. My review rating for this product is eight out of ten.

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.

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is filtering and web traffic caching for internet browsing, along with content filtering, using E2guardian together with other plugins.

In terms of content filtering, SquidGuard can also be used. We use common lists and then customized ones according to what the client has, with whitelists and blacklists customized by the client, according to the client's demand and wishes.

Regarding the main use case, I would add that many times it was necessary to do customization and create new helpers in the system so it could integrate better with Active Directory, in order to have better integration in authentication. Over the whole evolution process of Squid Proxy Cache Server together with E2guardian and SquidGuard, there has been evolution regarding helpers that they themselves produce and provide, such as NTLM authentication and nowadays Kerberos negotiation.

The best features that Squid Proxy Cache Server offers me are, first, its authentication capability and this integration with other players that I can work with. In addition, there is the ability to customize logs, which makes it easier for me to organize and then feed them into a SIEM to do this analysis and improve the security part.

The integration with other players and the customization of helpers contributes to my day-to-day work and my team's results, as it is an open system and open source, making it easy to open the code itself and program it. I can create new helpers and new circuits to do the integration. The better integration means that I can customize logs so that I have better logs, can process the content better, and even generate dashboards for clients in order to know how the environment's browsing is.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has had a considerable positive impact on my organization, since a large part of internet traffic needs to be filtered to remain within the company's policies, as well as to reduce the amount of necessary traffic. One example would be removing YouTube traffic or even creating bandwidth rates to control the network traffic of specific sites so the link does not become congested and the company can continue to have productivity.

The traffic reduction resulting from Squid Proxy Cache Server has improved productivity and brought measurable benefits to the company, as there were savings not only in bandwidth and costs, but also in staff idleness. With that, I was able to have an increase in productivity even in the team itself, which became less distracted with unnecessary matters and focused more on work. Costs went down and productivity improved.

I believe Squid Proxy Cache Server could also do more integrated authentication control, but also control over traffic acceptance, allowing traffic upon filling out a form showing what the need is for accessing that content which does not fall within the company's policies. Depending on that, it would integrate better. Additionally, it could work with new models and new website caching models where better use of binary search or searching could be made in order to get better processing. The part of SSL traffic filtering and SSL content needs attention, where a way could be designed to also do caching that is not harmful to the information. Control of information is needed so that sensitive actions are not cached, which would violate local security laws, such as in Brazil with LGPD, and in other places around the world as well. At the same time, having this security with improved internet performance would be beneficial, since cache does make a difference within the environment with Squid Proxy Cache Server.

Currently, I have been working for 30 years in my current field. I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for about 20 years.

In my experience, Squid Proxy Cache Server is extremely stable.

Scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server is extremely high. I was able to put several Squid Proxy Cache Server instances running and do load balancing via DNS through Round Robin or even via automatic proxy configuration within Windows. I always also used load balancing scripts for delivery using PHP to build a dynamic script system, but using Proxy PAC to manage and configure all the proxy nodes in all browsers.

I have never used customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server, so I cannot comment on it. I only used the community, and the community is very active, so the support and assistance from everyone is substantial.

I did not previously use a different solution. Usually, the clients I worked with did not use previous solutions.

I did not acquire Squid Proxy Cache Server through the AWS Marketplace. I installed it manually on the machine.

I have not obtained any return on investment, as unfortunately I did not work with the licensing side, so I cannot say there was a return on investment. However, technically, if I think about the implementation cost, the cost of use, of adjustments, over time, and maintenance, it has certainly already paid for itself.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that normally we used the public versions, so I never worked with it in terms of licensing. It was always the community edition.

Before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, the client always evaluates other options, such as next-generation firewalls like Check Point and Fortinet, among others. Their content control and caching capabilities are very small, so they are not so advantageous. The cost-benefit factor was always important, and those who chose to keep Squid Proxy Cache Server did so because of this cost-benefit issue.

My advice to other people who are considering using Squid Proxy Cache Server is that you can use it without fear, as in terms of operation, stability, and its purpose, it perfectly meets the target. Scalability will be determined according to the number of people to be served. I would rate this product an 8.

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is mostly for the scraping use case.

A quick specific example of how I use it for scraping is that Squid will be installed on data center machines where various IP addresses will be assigned, and Squid round-robins those IP addresses. This is how a scraper on every request gets rotating IP addresses.

The best features Squid Proxy Cache Server offers are related to the scraping use case, which is the only one I am aware of and have used. Of course, it is used as a cache server as well, and I think the main use case is to hold hot data in the cache so that it is not fetched from the internet every time. Squid Proxy Cache Server is mostly and widely used for scraping use cases.

In terms of scraping, Squid Proxy Cache Server has made things easier and more efficient for my organization because it is one of the commonly used open-source proxy servers. There is one more option in 3proxy, and I think both of them provide an almost similar feature set. Squid Proxy Cache Server is very good in hiding your IP address and exposing the IP address list that it has, which is very good for the scraping use case.

I think Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved because it was never designed for the scraping use case, but everyone changed the use case and started making use of it for scraping. I think it needs a change to embed the scraping use case, as I think 3proxy does it to a certain extent. That kind of embedding is required so that Squid Proxy Cache Server becomes really useful for scrapers.

I would like to add more about the needed improvements, specifically the instability and random crashes seen when we send a huge amount of traffic. It does not handle it gracefully. If it had some sort of graceful handling where it drops the extra connections, that resilience would be better.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for almost four years.

I have seen specific metrics and outcomes thanks to Squid Proxy Cache Server; it helps, and I can also tell the complaints I have heard on Squid Proxy Cache Server, with the complaints mostly being around how it is not very stable. It sometimes crashes, and it cannot handle too many connections.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is not stable.

In terms of scalability, I say it is unstable, and scalability-wise, it is stateless, so it could be scaled.

The customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server is non-existent because it is open-source, and there is no customer support.

I would not say that I have seen a return on investment. Of course, every software comes with certain use cases, so you have to use it, but I would not say money saved or something.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that mostly the cost was around setting up the virtual machine because the software is open-source.

Before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, we did evaluate 3proxy.

Regarding Squid Proxy Cache Server's AI capabilities, I think it lacks governance and security because I do not know if there are AI capabilities. Squid Proxy Cache Server does not have any AI capabilities, and I am not sure what you mean by AI capabilities. Squid Proxy Cache Server does not have any AI support, but what I have seen is that people mostly use it to scrape data, get data, and use that data to train AI models.

I think Squid Proxy Cache Server does not have any AI capability, which affects its accuracy and reliability of output.

The advice I would give to others looking into using Squid Proxy Cache Server is that if your use case is mostly around scraping, I think 3proxy is a bit better than Squid Proxy Cache Server, but more or less they are quite similar. However, I would say 3proxy is better than Squid Proxy Cache Server. I would rate my overall experience with Squid Proxy Cache Server a 6 out of 10.

My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is that it's an open source application implementation, with a frontend being an Apache server and a backend using MySQL databases. Squid Proxy Cache Server serves as both an internal application as well as for customer-facing needs. I have to use Squid Proxy Cache Server, which is compatible and can support multiple tasks at a time without any limit. It integrates with Postfix email server, and Linux is the main operating system for Squid Proxy Cache Server.

A specific example of how I used Squid Proxy Cache Server in my environment involves a LAMP setup, where the main server functions as a web proxy using Squid Proxy Cache Server. The frontend uses an Apache server for inventory assessment and ticketing with ServiceNow, all configured to require a proxy. The proxy is crucial from a customer point of view, allowing multiple customers to connect to the application effortlessly. There are no limitations on access and I find it to be a user-friendly compatible version, given that it is open source.

A specific example of how I used Squid Proxy Cache Server in my environment involves a LAMP setup, where the main server functions as a web proxy using Squid Proxy Cache Server. The frontend uses an Apache server for inventory assessment and ticketing with ServiceNow, all configured to require a proxy. The proxy is crucial from a customer point of view, allowing multiple customers to connect to the application effortlessly. There are no limitations on access and I find it to be a user-friendly compatible version, given that it is open source.

The best features Squid Proxy Cache Server offers include ease of adoption, integration, and cost savings. It is compatible with other operating systems including Red Hat, SUSE Linux, CentOS, Ubuntu, and is easy to install. These advantages make it appealing.

Squid Proxy Cache Server integrates well with community enterprise systems including CentOS and SUSE Linux, aligns with Red Hat-based initiatives, and incorporates multiple functionalities effortlessly given its open-source nature. It is easy to manage, flexible, and ensures cost optimization and savings. Overall, it is a wonderful software service.

I believe that Squid Proxy Cache Server could see improvements with updates to incorporate the latest kernel. Nowadays, there are many competitors available, but I want to emphasize that Squid Proxy Cache Server remains easy to adopt, integrate, manage, and is a compatible version that deserves attention.

Furthermore, with the rise of cloud systems and OpenShift, enabling such features in Squid Proxy Cache Server would be very beneficial for customers, allowing for better management.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server since around 2009 and 2014, specifically with Squid Proxy Cache Server running on Linux.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization over the past 10 plus years by helping resolve any issues that occurred without major outages. It has robust logging capabilities and excellent service once restarted. I have meticulously documented the sources where the internet and admin servers are located, and all issues have been rectified. Importantly, there has been no major outage in the 10 years I have used Squid Proxy Cache Server.

In terms of positive outcomes, Squid Proxy Cache Server once helped us manage a situation where a major server was in a hanging state, preventing end users from accessing the proxy. I entered into Squid Proxy Cache Server, finding that the services had disconnected, making it impossible to restart. I verified and cleared the logs and caches, resulting in increased memory system performance. After restarting Squid Proxy Cache Server, the issue was resolved within 30 minutes without any major outages.

We can increase the number of end users without the limitations found in other proxies, simply by configuring Squid Proxy Cache Server to allow specific users and IP ranges.

I do not have anything specific to add about the features, and I appreciate the opportunity to share my experience. I would rate this product 9 out of 10.

Twenty years ago in my first job, I deployed Squid Proxy Cache Server, which functioned principally to obtain statistics and share the internet connection for our company while making a validation from the final user with Active Directory.

These days my main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is more as a transparent proxy to obtain statistics and see graphs of the shared internet usage, and I also use it as a reverse proxy to balance the connections.

I utilize Squid Proxy Cache Server as a transparent proxy or reverse proxy as a load balancer for incoming traffic.

The best features Squid Proxy Cache Server offers, in my opinion, include validation with external users, ACLs, and the possibility to generate reports from all traffic.

The external user ACLs help us because different departments or networks may have different external connections and access permissions for the internet, and the reports I find most valuable include logs of connections and various open-source tools to obtain statistics and graphics.

Squid Proxy Cache Server positively impacts my organization because it is a software that has the ability to organize internet connections, sort them, and generate reports.

The improvements our organization has seen include enhanced speed since caching accelerates internet usage because Squid downloads images and avoids re-establishing every connection, loading from the local hard disk, which speeds up the internet connection, while security is strengthened with ACLs, and we achieve cost savings due to lower internet connection costs because of Squid Proxy Cache Server's cache server.

Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved with more integrations with external software, such as ticketing software, to create a broader ecosystem with operators, internal plugins, and easier load connections to external software and applications.

I would like to see integrations with external firewalls and commercial trademarks as well as different kinds of network equipment.

I have been using it for twenty years.

In my experience, Squid Proxy Cache Server is stable; I have been using it for twenty years, and it has remained stable throughout that time.

Regarding the scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server, it possesses the ability to rebalance connections and adjust patterns and zones to enhance internet connection speed.

Customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server is fine; at this moment, open-source configurations only require changing a few lines in configuration files, which is not difficult, and it is easy software to work with.

I have not previously used a different solution before Squid Proxy Cache Server because I have always worked with open source, and Squid Proxy Cache Server is the leader in open source solutions.

I have seen a return on investment due to the money saved by allowing more bandwidth for other applications, such as VPNs, since the internet connection is secure with the cache and proxy, which also saves time because we only need to check one proxy server instead of all PCs, enabling centralized administration, and we need fewer employees since only one server handles connectivity and monitoring instead of checking routers and switches.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing involves using an open-source Squid Proxy product, so the costs are low because it is open-source software.

It is possible for me to evaluate other options before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, but at this moment, I do not know of any other options.

Regarding the scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server, it possesses the ability to rebalance connections and adjust patterns and zones to enhance internet connection speed.

I would advise those considering Squid Proxy Cache Server to consider its easy configuration, the availability of options for sharing internet connections, load balancing, and obtaining reports on traffic statistics.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is good software that I enjoy using, and it provides a stable connection, which makes me happy. I rated this review an eight out of ten.

One of the main use cases for Squid Proxy Cache Server is as a proxy server with caching capabilities for a software development company to secure the traffic, speed up the upload, and reduce the traffic for similar websites like Google or loading some media content.

Another use case I have for Squid Proxy Cache Server was creating a secured solution as proxy traffic for a global international endpoint. It helped to create a solution similar to a VPN, but using Squid Proxy Cache Server which was easy to implement and deploy, and bind it with database authentication. Squid Proxy Cache Server has many different features embedded which could help create a solution for any flow that is needed.

In my opinion, the best features Squid Proxy Cache Server offers are that it is open-source, well-known, well-documented, has great performance, and has many plugins and features embedded, including the security capabilities. You can limit traffic, reduce traffic, scan traffic, and create whitelisting of websites or blacklisting of websites, such as mature content or whatever is not allowed in your company or project needs. Additionally, there are different models to authenticate through Squid Proxy Cache Server with a database and create solutions bound to the username. You can actually grant access for a specific user by their specific credentials.

Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization by reducing the cost of internet providing traffic, speeding up the connection, and speeding up the loading for the developers. For another project, one of the products was built on Squid Proxy Cache Server fully.

Traffic was reduced by approximately thirty to forty percent when comparing caching and without caching through Squid Proxy Cache Server, so it dramatically reduced the cost.

Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved if the community works more and if this software is used more widely, so it will get more features from the market demands. The best approach is to use it more and follow the business needs.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server for quite some time.

Squid Proxy Cache Server is absolutely stable.

The scalability of Squid Proxy Cache Server is difficult to assess because it depends on project needs and traffic demands, but it can actually handle a high amount of traffic. It requires resources for processing traffic and depends on how many rules you will implement. However, because it is easy to deploy and exists in all Linux distributions, you can actually automate those deployments, so I expect that scalability is quite good.

I have never connected with customer support for Squid Proxy Cache Server and have used only official documentation.

Before choosing Squid Proxy Cache Server, we knew that it is very powerful and has all the features which we needed, and it would be easily embedded into our product and infrastructure. Squid Proxy Cache Server covered all our requirements, so there was no need to look for anything else.

We built a financial product on Squid Proxy Cache Server, but I cannot share metrics because it is company private information.

The setup cost for us with Squid Proxy Cache Server was only the matter of the deployment and resources which were used for running Squid Proxy Cache Server. We did not have any issues with licensing and pricing at all, so Squid Proxy Cache Server is open-source and exists in the repositories of all Linux distributions.

My advice for others looking into using Squid Proxy Cache Server is to look into the official documentation, try to understand how it works, and review all the features and all bottlenecks which you can see during your setup. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

I use Squid Proxy Cache Server for traffic by storing frequently accessed web pages and accessing them locally. This helps reduce bandwidth consumption and latency.

The main use case of Squid Proxy Cache Server in terms of IT infrastructure is to provide a stable, secure, and reliable foundation for running an organization's business application and digital services.

Squid Proxy Cache Server can protect corporate assets through threat defense, using firewalls to block unauthorized access. Similarly, it offers identity management, which restricts system entry to verified personnel, and data encryption, which secures sensitive data during network transit.

Squid Proxy Cache Server provides cost savings in terms of low latency and bandwidth consumption.

I have noticed specific improvements with lower hardware spend, as cloud infrastructure removes the need to buy expensive physical servers, resulting in reduced facility bills. Consolidating data centers lowers electricity, cooling, and real estate costs, and also minimizes maintenance.

I think we can improve Squid Proxy Cache Server by optimizing its caching efficiency, hardware resource allocation, and network configuration, such as increasing the RAM cache. We can achieve optimization by increasing the RAM cache. Additionally, modern storage systems can also optimize Squid Proxy Cache Server by using the rock storage engine for fast, multiple, threaded disk caching and moving to high-speed NVMe SSDs for the physical cache directory.

Centralized administration can be improved by automating configuration deployments and gaining deep visibility through logging and monitoring. Moving away from manual command line tweaks makes it easier to maintain, secure, and scale.

Regarding Squid Proxy Cache Server's AI capabilities, we can improve through automation and must automate tasks to make things easier for system engineers.

I do not think we should inherently trust the accuracy of Squid Proxy Cache Server when it comes to traffic content, security filtering, and logging without additional verification layers. While Squid is highly accurate at routing and caching protocols such as HTTP and FTP, it has specific blind spots that can lead to false data or mis-threats.

By default, Squid cannot see inside HTTPS traffic. It only sees the destination domain name, which poses a risk as users can bypass URL filters or download malware over encrypted connections. Squid's logs only show the traffic as safe or clean since it cannot inspect the payload. The fix should be enabling SSL bump or SSL/TLS decryption to decrypt, inspect, and accurately log encrypted traffic.

I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server since 2022. We migrated our infrastructure and our firewall from SonicWall to pfSense, and after that, I have been using Squid Proxy Cache Server.

I will definitely encourage others to maintain and implement Squid Proxy Cache Server in their infrastructure because I think your team is really working hard to improve it.

I believe the current offering is sufficient, and I would appreciate incentives and gifts.

The service is fine and basically very responsible.

Here is my haiku for this review: Proxy guards our path, speeds and saves with careful eyes. Trust grows, room to grow.

My overall review rating for Squid Proxy Cache Server is seven out of ten.