Selfhosted

40006 readers

1126 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

What do you guys do about usernames / passwords for your local services? (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Basically every local service is accessed via a web interface, and every interface wants a username and password. Assuming none of these services are exposed to the internet, how much effort do you put into security here?
Personally, I didn't really think about it when I started. I make a half-assed effort at security where I don't use "admin" or anything obvious as the username, and I use a decent-but-not-industrial password - but I started reusing the u/p as the number of services I'm running grew. I have my browsers remember the u/ps.
Should one go farther than this? And if so, what's the threat model? Is there an easier way?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

Ipv6 is fantastic, it has less overhead than v4 and removes the need for NAT or other translation. Support can be spotty in cheaper and older devices but there's no reason not to learn and adopt it where possible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (6 children)

You have to take extra steps to ensure that the benefits of NAT aren't lost when you switch to ipv6. Everyone knowing exactly which device you're using because a single ipv6 IP per-device is the default.

Ipv6 is nice, but also you need to know what you're doing to get all the benefits without any of the downsides.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Your firewall should take care of that, it's pretty rare to be connected directly without one and by default any decent routing package will filter incoming traffic that's not in the state tracking table. NAT isn't designed for security, any security benefit it provides is a side effect rather than the intended purpose.

Edit: check out ipv6 privacy extensions too, there are solutions there that can reduce info disclosure if that's a concern. You can accomplish many of the same benefits of NAT with v6 features without the downsides that NAT brings.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

There was an article that many Routers were shipped with Ipv6 firewall off, and less savvy users would never know to check

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)