this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
92 points (95.1% liked)

Selfhosted

44954 readers
718 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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. 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.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been running my server without a firewall for quite some time now, I have a piped instance and snikket running on it. I've been meaning to get UFW on it but I've been too lazy to do so. Is it a necessary thing that I need to have or it's a huge security vulnerability? I can only SSH my server from only my local network and must use a VPN if I wanna SSH in outside so I'd say my server's pretty secure but not the furthest I could take it. Opinions please?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago (11 children)

You have a firewall. It’s in your router, and it is what makes it so that you have to VPN into the server. Otherwise the server would be accessible. NAT is, effectively, a firewall.

Should you add another layer, perhaps an IPS or deny-listing? Maybe it’s a good idea.

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Op means, as they said, a firewall on the server itself.

NAT is, effectively, a firewall.

No it isn't. Stop giving advice on edge security.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Are you saying that NAT isn’t effectively a firewall or that a NAT firewall isn’t effectively a firewall?

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

NAT simply maps IPS across subnet boundaries in such a way that upstream routing tables don't need updating.

If you use destination NAT forward rules to facilitate specific destination port access, you are using a firewall.

What sort of isp supplied residential equipment doesn’t block inbound connections? Pedantically, you’re correct.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)