I've had a problem with Fiddler ever since my machine was upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows 10. If I configure Fiddler to decrypt HTTPS traffic, any traffic it captures is, for lack of a better word, killed.
For example, if I visit the (HTTPS) page that documents configuring HTTPS decryption, without Fiddler, I see it as normal:
However, once I begin capturing traffic, and reload the page, I get this:
All of the responses feature this same exception message:
I only use Fiddler occasionally, when I need to see what's going into and out of my apps. I could've sworn I was able to do this with HTTPS before migrating to Windows 10. I'm not sure what changed, but Fiddler has become fairly useless to me now that all the traffic it captures fails. Any help would be appreciated.
Related
I recently began using Fiddler to capture requests from a windows application that I believe is sending malevolent requests. This said application actually has a browser extension for both Chrome and Microsoft Edge. However, only on the Windows Application does Fiddler gives me a yellow pop up: "The System proxy was changed, click to reenable Fiddler capture." This happens specifically when the App begins running and the user logs in.
An example is seen on here: Fiddler not capturing traffic. Proxy settings keep getting changed
I also notice in my windows machine network proxy settings that the App automatically checks "use a setup script" and provides a link to their proxy script.
On my machine, I clearly still am seeing many requests after clicking the yellow pop up. I also am still seeing many requests called by this App. However, I am worried that there could be an instance where the App is clearly able to send requests that it can hide from Fiddler, and only let Fiddler see the requests it wants it to.
The reason I believe this is that Fiddler is a proxy, and the App is yet another proxy. Fiddler doesn't know that it's intercepting a network's traffic through the App's proxy. So Fiddler wouldn't know if it's not hearing everything, and neither would I.
Is this a realistic fear?
If so, where can I find some more information on what is happening, and how to bypass it?
If not, that's all I need to know.
I have a strange situation using Fiddler to capture the HTTP/HTTPs traffic from an android application, in general, fiddler works fine, I got everything from any other app as chrome, and more, but this specific app not connect to the internet or lose the connection once I connect to fiddler Proxy server, I don't know why this happened also I don't know if someone has an explanation or got the same issue before, because fiddler in general working, but only this app, once I back to the normal connection and stop connecting to the Fiddler proxy server the connection back to this app.
so if someone has a solution or there is a similar problem as I did not find such kind of problem when I searched it will help.
I use the normal way to capture the data from fiddler by open Fiddler proxy server and connect my Android phone to my PC IP and the port of fiddler app, I was thinking about it and I'm not sure maybe this happened because the app did not trust the root certificate of the https of fiddler or the app protect from sniffing by disconnect the connection once the Android phone use a proxy, I am new using fiddler so I'm not sure how it's going.
I read about also certificate pinning, but I think this is not the case as if it happened it normally connect and show Tunnel or something like this as I understand in the fiddler screen, but not lose the connection.
Thanks in advance.
I have Wireshark 2.4.6 installed on macOS High Sierra. For some reason, Wireshark is not capturing any HTTP traffic across my machine. I have explicitly opened multiple webpages on a browser and filtered for HTTP traffic, but I am not able to see any HTTP packets.
I have an Ubunbtu virtual machine on my computer. When I booted that and opened webpages on it, I was able to see the corresponding HTTP traffic on Wireshark (which runs on my host macOS itself).
Why can I not see HTTP traffic for websites I open on macOS browsers? Does macOS treat HTTP differently somehow (if that is even possible)?
Make sure that you are accessing websites bound with http but not https
The reason behind this is https is 'http secure' which ensures secure communication over a network and hence it undergoes encryption and decryption end-to-end, so wireshark won't be able to capture them. Instead you can search for TLS/SSL in the search bar and voila!, you would be able to see them since https is secured with either SSL or TLS.
And yes, the next question that might confuse you is why is wireshark able to capture packets when I run an 'HTTPS' site on a virtual machine?
It's because of OCSP(Online Certificate Status Protocol)(I'm very much sure that when you were able to capture HTTPS packets when browsing on a virtual machine, you would have observed OCSP too). So, over here, OCSP tells you that X.509 certificates(used in both SSL and TLS) have been revoked since they were compromised, so putting it in simple terms, data has been decrypted and the certificates have been compromised.
P.S: I tried the above in Kali Virtual Machine, but I do think it's the same for Ubuntu.
i'm too beginner in squid. i want a way to remain anonymous over the net. i also want to be able to access the contents of the internet which are filtered. my Windows computer is beyond firewall (filtered). my server (CentOS 5) is not. for example, when i enter http://facebook.com in the browser url, it redirects to an intranet ip which tells me to avoid going to this site!
now i've installed squid on server and traffic is propagated through this server. but this redirection occurs. so still i can't open filtered sites.
what can i do? a friend of mine told that the only way is to use https. ie. the connection between browser (Firefox) and the server must use this protocol. is it right? and how can i do that?
what's your suggestion? i don't want necessarily to use squid. besides, https protocol gets banned or decreased in speed in my country sometimes. so i prefer the protocol remain http. i thought also about writing a code in client and server to transform, compress/decompress and packetize as hoax binary http packets to be sent as much speed and success as possible. but i'm not an expert in this context and now i prefer more straightforward ways.
i respect any help/info.
I assume you are located in Iran. I would suggest using TOR if you mainly access websites. The latest release works reasonably well in Iran. It also includes an option to obfuscate traffic so it is not easily detectable that you are using TOR.
See also this question: https://tor.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/using-tor-in-iran-for-the-first-time-user-guide
A easy way to get the TOR package is using the autoresponder: https://www.torproject.org/projects/gettor.html
In case the website is blocked, it works as follows:
Users can communicate with GetTor robot by sending messages via email.
Currently, the best known GetTor email address is gettor#torproject.org.
This should be the most current stable GetTor robot as
it is operated by Tor Project.
To ask for Tor Browser a user should send an email to GetTor robot
with one of the following options in the message body:
windows: If the user needs Tor Browser for Windows.
linux: If the user needs Tor Browser for Linux.
osx: If the user needs Tor Browser for Mac OSX.
I have a program that I'm trying to reverse engineer.
It gets a specific key by using HTTP GET on some URLs.
I need to figure out the details on how this works.
The good news is that there's the option to preform these requests over an HTTP proxy.
Would anybody know of a program to monitor a specific application's network traffic?
I've tried Wireshark, but its no giving me enough information (Headers, URL path).
After Wireshark, I tried FreeProxy. The problem with FreeProxy is that it only gives headers for around 1/3 of the requests and it doesn't give the full path either.
Could anyone suggest a better alternative for monitoring the internet activity of my application?
I thought Wireshark was able to capture the full packet with all its content? If so, how can it not give you enough information? Maybe you need to revise your traffic capture config?
It's been a while since I used Wireshark, but if you have trouble capturing full packets, what you can do is use tcpdump to capture and write to file, then view the capture file using Wireshark. tcpdump's -s option will allow you to set the packet size so as to capture full packets.
I use Fiddler for all my HTTP traffic monitoring. It is very powerful and displays data in the HTTP layer only. Wireshark will get all of your data, but it displays the details at a much lower layer. It even has capability to decrypt SSL traffic.
Fiddler installs itself as a proxy, and configures IE and FF automatically to use it when it is on. If you are having too much traffic mix in, then you can install Fiddler on a remote box, and point your proxy to that IP address.
I was recommemded another program called "mitmproxy" which worked perfectly for what I needed. Fiddler also worked, but SSL was giving me problems.