[squid-users] Dumb parent proxy...

Hello there.
I have a serious problem, which haven't been found by me in usenet, mailing
archives, nor FAQ and Configuration issues.
There is a Nokia Checkpoint Proxy Server at my work. It's so stupid, like
i've never seen before. One of features is password authorization. Now, i
configured my local squid to pass requests to this "telephone". My squid
don't use passwords, cache_peer appends "Proxy-Authorization: Basic blah64"
to HTTP headers, and it's good: 200 OK and requested page is going to me.

It's good, but _not_ really.

Some clients will DO NOT send "User-Agent: " HTTP header. In this case
Checkpoint can't authorize client even when "Proxy-Authorization: Basic
blah64" is sent. One of those clients is Seti client. When "User-Agent: " is
absent, "telephone" returns:

HTTP/1.0 401 Unauthorized
WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="FW-1. Reason: no user Server "

My questions is: is Squid able to add some HTTP headers when client don't
send them? Of course I think about User-Agent, but it will be useful at all.
Example will be:
User-Agent absent -> we add "User-Agent: Default Squid User Agent Dude"
User-Agent present -> we send as is.

Greetings

-- 
.==[ Mariusz Jedrzejewski ]==---------------------------------------.
+==[ mj(at)polcard.com.pl ]==[ http://206046.prv.pl ]==-------------+
+==[ GG/EKG: 1111022 ]==[ GPG: http://206046.prv.pl/Mariusz.asc ]==-+
`==[ Registered Linux User #206046 ]==[ JabberID: mj@chrome.pl ]==--'