Pidgin Proxy servers

Daniel Atallah datallah at
Wed Nov 28 18:21:15 EST 2012

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Leon Goldstein
<lgoldstein at> wrote:
> Compliance=  we us a third party service to capture all instant messages
> and it works by assigning a proxy.

Pidgin has reasonably good proxy support, it supports HTTP, SOCKS4 and
SOCKS5 proxies.

The biggest known gap in functionality that I'm aware of is support
for PAC files.

The only smarsh reference I've heard of was someone who had difficulty
getting the AIM protocol to work through it - it looked like smarsh
was changing something about the server's response to the point where
it was problematic for pidgin.
You can see the thread here:


> On Nov 28, 2012, at 2:15 PM, David Woolley <forums at>
> wrote:
> Leon Goldstein wrote:
> We are adding compliance of IM for our clients and our compliance
> company is stating that pidgin does not work well with proxy servers.
> I didn't understand "compliance" on the first reading.  The question was
> compliance with what?  I presume you mean some financial trading rules
> that require all communications to be logged, and not the payment card
> industry rules that require some things should never be logged!
> I wonder if the issue with Pidgin is that, being a multi-protocol
> client, some of the protocols won't be known to the man in the middle
> software, and the security architecture of some of them may be badly
> compromised even though the user is aware of the man in the middle, e.g.
> login credentials may be compromised.
> --
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
> _______________________________________________
> Support at mailing list
> Want to unsubscribe?  Use this link:

More information about the Support mailing list