[Development] Contributing to the Qt Project behind a hefty firewall and proxy server

[Sean Harmer]

On Friday 13 July 2012 16:10:22 Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > He also says that you should at the same time have a discussion with
> > Corporate Security to make them understand that the current situation is
> > hurting the organization, and try to get it changed so you _don't_ have
> > to circumvent Corporate Security. (Normally it's grounds for getting the
> > "pink slip" immediately.)
> 
> Why open the port up globally with its own drawbacks just because of
> one project? If this can get fixed, and the "circumventing"
> (communicating with patches good for a company over 443) is accepted
> in a network (let it corporate or personal), I do not see the problem
> and the reason to change the existing practicies.

If it is for a personal network (as you now seem to be hinting at) then what 
is the issue with opening up said ports for outbound traffic? 

If you are really that bothered then only open up the ports for outbound 
traffic when you need to use them and then close them again after. You could 
even place restrictions on the allowed source and destination IPs etc if 
desired.

Why would opening these ports for outbound traffic be any more risky than any 
other existing ports.

For corporate networks I agree that the proposed solution is fine to help get 
around overly restrictive IT policies. I know first hand from previous 
experience that these can take a long time and the patience of a saint to get 
changed.

Kind regards,

Sean