Tinyproxy version

Doesn't matter, asking about functionality/new feature

Question

Hey there, I've had a socks5 setup using dante and recently decided to lock it down under user:password.
However socks has zero encryption in the protocol, so that kind of makes authentication meaningless.
Http proxies on the otherhand can utilise SSL by being a https-hosted proxy, and having used tinyproxy before moving to socks for udp/generic-tcp support, I'm back!

After looking at #388 it looks like we don't plan on forcing clients to encrypt their BasicAuth data, but the recommended practice is to hide tinyproxy behind stunnel or credir.
In keeping with this project's mantra; if not SSL, are we open to having tiny support unix sockets?

Instead of

• hosting the proxy on a network interface (even just loopback)
• having to make sure that's protected from any traffic
• hooking that port up to ssl via 3rd party executable to final access point

We could

• have the proxy listen to a socket file on the filesystem
• let the 3rd party encrypted traffic directly access the unix domain socket