Selfhosted
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.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
-
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
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!
view the rest of the comments
DANE provides user friction..but as OP mentioned TLS doesn't work
Which means I don't care because nobody except myself will be able to use it.
I'd care a lot if Firefox and Chrome supported it OOTB
It works fine, just ignore the warning and don't enter any sensitive info
then why use DANE. this is just plain old TOFU
Ah yes, the windows method "just click okay and don't read it or think too hard"
If you're just pushing for WebPKI without "thinking too hard" about perpretrating a security system with a large number of failure points, then you're following that windows method.
SSL/TLS have very specific benefits. None of which matter that much for reading random articles on the web. So I don't see the problem with this website doing their own thing to bring attention to the potential issues of the current system.
it is a huge benefit if a man in the middle cannot run scripts on your computer.
there is no problem with that. this could work, with the required patch to firefox, also in the repo.
IMO when reading random articles on the internet you already have to worry about untrusted scripts. I just use NoScript, and if the website requires Javascript I move on
I don't agree, I think there is a difference in likely outcomes. but even without scripts, you don't want you article's content (text, images, statements or names) be falsified by an attacker. Unless you are just reading the article to waste time, and magically what you read will not influence your views.
I already considered that, and for an untrusted website I already don't trust the content or the scripts. So it doesn't matter if it was modified or not, it's still untrusted.
Facts can be verified with sources you do trust (which should be using HTTPS). Logic can be used to verify others.
but then why are you reading it? is it cat photos and cooking recipes only? or does it have articles about pricey things you could buy, news, life improvement tips, car and other thing repair docs/advice?
A lot of times its tech opinion articles. Stuff like "why AI is bad". And I read the arguments and judge them for myself.