SOCKS proxy support

Feature requests for the Mac OS X version of Transmission
tkoun
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:36 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by tkoun »

proxy support! proxy support! proxy support! proxy support! proxy support!

it's never late to recognize a bad decision, as W. Churchill said: "only the stupid don't change their minds"...
please revert to version 2.05;
you'll do thus the community a great favor of using a great piece of software at its best configuration.

tkoun
tkoun
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:36 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by tkoun »

ignatius_reilly
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:07 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by ignatius_reilly »

tkoun, I registered just to ask: how do I use the "build" you linked to? A little guidance would be very much appreciated. I'm moderatly tech proficient and can follow directions.

I'd love to keep using Transmission and add BT Guard. Downloaded Vuze and was immediately freaked out by the amount of garbage it tried to install. Reminded me of a PC app with all that crapware.
johndoe32102002
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:27 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by johndoe32102002 »

To install the Launchpad version of Tranmission (2.13 (11501)), you will have to do the following in Ubuntu:
1.) Open Terminal (gnome-terminal)
2.) Type 'sudo add-apt-repository ppa:steubens/transmission-proxy-support' without the quotes
3.) Authenticate
4.) Then type 'sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade && sudo apt-get install transmission'

This should install the version of Transmission that supports proxies (note: tracker-only proxying).
ignatius_reilly
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:07 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by ignatius_reilly »

johndoe32102002 wrote:To install the Launchpad version of Tranmission (2.13 (11501)), you will have to do the following in Ubuntu:
1.) Open Terminal (gnome-terminal)
2.) Type 'sudo add-apt-repository ppa:steubens/transmission-proxy-support' without the quotes
3.) Authenticate
4.) Then type 'sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade && sudo apt-get install transmission'

This should install the version of Transmission that supports proxies (note: tracker-only proxying).
Oh, so is this a Linux-only solution? I'd assumed since this is the Mac Requests forum it was something that one could do on a Mac.
sn00ze
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:05 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by sn00ze »

anyone have a Mac solution for this one?
Estreptococo
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by Estreptococo »

I switched to deluge http://deluge-torrent.org/ really nice, and has proxy support. different, and worth a check.
And, yes, I would love full proxy support in transmission
securespace
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:27 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by securespace »

Still using v 2.1 because it supports proxies without having to set the entire system to a proxy.

Please bring back this feature set it was a mistake to remove it in the first place.

Thanks.
securespace
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:27 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by securespace »

Jordan wrote:Hi lorcopotia,

Thanks for joining the forums to add your vote. Even though proxy support is unlikely to be in future versions of Transmission, the Transmission devs really do appreciate constructive feedback.

If proxy support is a showstopper feature, you might consider using a third-party tool, or a different BitTorrent client which supports proxies, such as KTorrent or qBitTorrent.
Haven't seen so stubborn developer yet :)
For those asking for PROXY - just move to a different app will ya!
The Transmission developers will NOT give you what you want, why should they?
Just leave them alone and use qBitTorrent, it's a nicer app anyway so why using Transmission?
whatfireflies
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 8:11 am

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by whatfireflies »

I'm a long time Transmission user, but I recently switched over to a new provider that's not friendly towards bittorrent.

I get megabit speeds for very cheap, but no public IP address and heavily shaped bittorrent traffic.

So I'm basically forced to run bittorrent through a SOCKS proxy, for example with "ssh -D"

It's sad that Transmission does not (and apparently will not) have this feature. Farewell.
ajslater
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:53 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by ajslater »

Transmission is superior to most other clients except for proxy & VPN support.

It makes me sad to have had to switch to uTorrent.
sadock
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:51 am

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by sadock »

My VPN provider supplies proxy service, but only for applications which support the SOCKS5 protocols. Transmission does not. I've used it for quite some time. I've donated $$$ to the cause because I've been totally satisfied with the application's performance and ongoing development over the years. Now it appears that Transmission's developers have no intention of adding this feature. So now I will have to investigate other bit torrent applications and evaluate whether any of them can meet all of my needs.

Cest la vie. Those are my two cents.
mvnjpy
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 11:24 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by mvnjpy »

How do we upvote for support of this? Because I had just found that Transmission did not support proxies, I had a sudden lapse of judgement and tried the second most popular torrent client, uTorrent. My God, the first things it did when I installed it was kill my browser process (so I lost all the state in my tabs) and replace my default search engine with Yahoo (it probably had some kickback param in there so they get paid for this). This is despicable and should be illegal. I'm back to Transmission, but please add proxy support!
EricJilot
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 3:29 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by EricJilot »

I just discover Transmission and I love it. That is with one exception, it really needs to support SOCKS proxy. It's the one feature that is needed for me to use Transmission over any other choice. It is also the one feature that is required before I will make a donation (even if it was on the road map).
TomE
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 5:52 pm

Re: SOCKS proxy support

Post by TomE »

Please include my vote in support of the return of proxy support.

I've found no reasonable explanation behind why the developer removed proxy support subsequent to 2.11. The best I've come up with is here, and it makes no sense to me: "I decided to remove the feature, intentionally without announcement, to see how many people noticed, and to use that feedback to determine how important proxies are."

Well, many people immediately noticed and they complained about it. No one ever said, "Hey, thanks for doing that," just the opposite. For over 5 years the demand to return the proxy settings has been overwhelming. Yet it still hasn't been restored.

If anything there is even more demand now for internet security and privacy, and this is evidenced in the huge numbers of people subscribing to proxy and vpn services. To tell us that we should just change our Network prefs and load our proxy setting there is only viable for some. The fact is that's a major inconvenience for many of the rest of us it's not a workable solution at all, and other forum members have already given good explanations as to why that's so.

In my case I need to use both vpn and socks5 proxy, but I only want and need to proxy for bittorrent traffic. I know from personal experience the risks of relying on vpn alone because vpn connections do occasionally go down, leaving one vulnerable to having their real IP exposed in a swarm. Running both vpn and proxy is significant added insurance.

So, please, let's just have some honesty here Transmission dev team. Why did you guys really remove the proxy settings? Was there some outside pressure? Legal threats? What really happened? Knowing that will, in all likelihood, will also explain the reason why it's never been restored in spite of the overwhelming support for it. Please just come clean about this.

And please don't now give us a repeat of this: "Locked duplicate thread. This has been asked, and answered, before." No, you haven't answered these questions. Please do us the courtesy of an honest response by full disclosure.
Post Reply