Category talk:OWASP WebScarab Project
is there any perofrmance issues if more than 250+ users are hitting with webscarab proxyserver. pls share your expereinces..thanx Rajan
Hi, I have a query regarding Webscarab Proxy setup on Windows machine. I have one machine which is acting as Proxy server whose ip is (10.10.10.100) and is listening on port 8080. I have another machine which i am using as a client.In the browser settings Tools->Internet Options ->Connections ->LAN settings I have checked to Use Proxy serevr (have given my Proxy server IP 10.10.10.100 and port 8080 I have installed Webscarab in my client machine . In the Webscarbs menu Tools->Proxies have given [10.10.10.100 and port 8080]. I am starting Webgoat project but am not able to see and http requests intercepted in webscarab . So my Webscarab is not set properly. I know the default port of Webscarab is 8008. So how should i dop the set up to solve this problem. Thanks, Madhavi
- To all who have this problem:
- It looks like in the setup above there is nothing that tells the browser to send any requests through WebScarab. In Internet Explorer's "LAN Settings" dialog, declare 127.0.0.1:8008 (the local WebScarab's listening port) as proxy.
- With the setup so far, WebGoat can be accessed and the traffic goes Internet Explorer->WebScarab->proxy server->WebGoat. However, WebGoat is probably installed on the client machine, so it might seem that it can be accessed both at 127.0.0.1 and at 10.x.y.z or the associated host names, "localhost" for the first and whatever for the second. If the 10.x.y.z way is used, it should always work.
- I am not sure that it makes sense to use the proxy server (10.10.10.100) for accessing WebGoat, the way WebScarab does in the description. It would make sense, for example, if the machine with WebGoat was only accessible by going through the proxy server or if even traffic to WebScarab had to go through the proxy server for logging. In order to avoid the proxy server, the "No Proxy" field in WebScarab's Tools->Proxies dialog should be used. I think it accepts the host names that need to be exempt from being accessed through the proxy server.
- --Thomas Herlea 11:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)