you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 9 points 5 months ago (26 children)
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Easy for me but not my aunts, cousins or father in law to setup and use.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    they are not setting up the Jellyfin server either, why would they need to bother with the VPN?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 5 months ago (15 children)

    I'd rather just not use it at that point

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 5 months ago* (12 children)

    you are better just closing up shop then, because it's not like the other services you are hosting are much better. vulnerabilities being discovered don't mean they don't exist, it just means the software is not popular enough or too complex for someone to look into it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (11 children)

    lol the whole internet better shut down right? Too vulnerable

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    much of the internet is run on simpler software or by full time employees tasked to deal with all this. but sure, ignorance is bliss, what you don't see does not exist, etc etc, keep running your Jellyfin exposed to the internet. you wouldnt even get to know when your system is compromised. but you know what? you could even remove your password for extra convenience. who would want to log in to a random jellyfin account anyway! surely no one! just don't recommend these practices to anyone, because you are putting them at risk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    I mean I do this stuff for a living but okay go off king

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    would not ever use your services in that case

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] -2 points 5 months ago* (6 children)

    wow not just totally unprofessional, but even downvoting the calling out the lack of credible security! you can be ashamed of yourself, and hope that your clients never find out you are a contrarian

    I really doubt your work has anything to do with computers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    You're hilarious. I haven't downvoted you, others are reading these threads as well.

    Talking about security... Have you heard of intrusion detection, process isolation, or principle of least privilege?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

    Talking about security... Have you heard of intrusion detection, process isolation, or principle of least privilege?

    are you aware that the very popular official docker image for jellyfin still runs the jellyfin process as root? or that most people just mount their media libraries as a read-write volume because they don't know better?

    I would also be very interested about statistics on how many jellyfin admins run intrusion detection software on their system, if you have any.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

    I'm not running my stuff as root if I don't have to. You're moving goalposts

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    "if I don't have to". and, is your jellyfin running as root? or are you running it a different way, e.g. from apt package (where I believe it's sensible by default)? I smell doubt.

    but in either case it does not matter how do you run jellyfin. what I care is how many other people are running jellyfin exposed to the internet because they think its safe, because people on forums told them so, with the popular docker image where it is being ran as root.

    I'm not moving goalposts. I'm still firmly besides my point that for the general jellyfin admin exposing jellyfin to the wide internet is unsafe and irresponsible. and seeing all the downvotes but no one else telling their opinion, it seems no one knows better either and they are just angry I pointed this out.
    again, I don't care how are you running Jellyfin. I don't want to convince you on that, you do whats best for you, it seems you might have done some precautions. what I care is to not recommend these practices to others (without the full picture), because they are unsafe, especially without further precautions like running a(n unofficial) rootless jellyfin docker image and an intrusion detection system, which I guarantee most people won't have.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Which doesn't work for The grand majority of devices that would be used to watch said media.

    Tvs game consoles rokus so on so forth typically don't support VPN clients.

    The Jonathan clients for these devices also typically don't support alternative authentication methods which would allow you to put jellyfin behind a proxy and have the proxy exposed to the internet. Gating all access to jellyfin apis behind a primary authentication layer thus mitigating effectively all security vulnerabilities that are currently open.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago*

    Tvs game consoles rokus so on so forth typically don't support VPN clients.

    and that's why you set up a VPN client box on the location, set it up as a regular VPN client, and install a reverse proxy on it that the dumb clients can connect to.

    the VPN box could be as simple as an old android phone no one uses, and termux

  • source
  • parent