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:
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
What’s your go too (secure) method for casting over the internet with a Jellyfin server.
I’m wondering what to use and I’m pretty beginner at this
Nginx in front of it, open ports for https (and ssh), nothing more. Let's encrypt certificate and you're good to go.
I would not publicly expose ssh. Your home IP will get scanned all the time and external machines will try to connect to your ssh port.
fail2ban with endlessh and abuseipdb as actions
Anything that's not specifically my username or git gets instantly blocked. Same with correct users but trying to use passwords or failing authentication in any way.
Sorry, misunderstanding here, I'd never open SSH to the internet, I meant it as "don't block it via your server's firewall."
They can try all they like, man. They're not gonna guess a username, key and password.
Doesn't take that to leverage an unknown vulnerability in ssh like:
That's why it's common best practice to never expose ssh to raw internet if you can help it; but yes it's not the most risky thing ever either.
So? Pubkey login only and fail2ban to take care of resource abuse.
Why would you need to expose SSH for everyday use? Or does Jellyfin require it to function?
Maybe leave that behind some VPN access.
I agree, but SSH is more secure than Jellyfin. it shouldn't be exposed like that, others in the comments already pointed out why
Jellyfin through a traefik proxy, with a WAF as middleware and brute force login protected by fail2ban
I use a cloudflare tunnel, ISP won't give me a static IP and I wanna keep my firewall locked down tight.
OpenVPN into my router
Wireguard vpn into my home router. Works on android so fire sticks etc can run the client.
I see everyone in this thread recommending a VPN or reverse proxy for accessing Jellyfin from outside the LAN. While I generally agree, I don't see a realistic risk in exposing Jellyfin directly to the internet. ~~It supports HTTPS and certificates nowadays, so there’s no need for outside SSL termination anymore.~~ (See Edit 2)
In my setup, which I've been running for some time, I've port-forwarded only Jellyfin's HTTPS port to eliminate the possibility of someone ending up on pure HTTP and sending credentials unencrypted. I've also changed the Jellyfin's default port to a non-standard one to avoid basic port-scanning bots spamming login attempts. I fully understand that this falls into the security through obscurity category, but no harm in it either.
Anyone wanna yell at me for being an idiot and doing everything wrong? I'm genuinely curious, as the sentiment online seems to be that at least a reverse proxy is almost mandatory for this kind of setup, and I'm not entirely sure why.
Edit: Thank you everyone for your responses. While I don't agree with everything, the new insight is appreciated.
Edit 2: I've been informed that infact the support for HTTPS will be removed in a future version. From v10.11 release notes:
Deprecation Notice: Jellyfin’s internal handling of TLS/SSL certificates and configuration in the web server will be removed in a future version. No changes to the current system have been made in 10.11, however future versions will remove the current system and instead will provide advanced instructions to configure the Kestrel webserver directly for this relatively niche usecase. We strongly advise anyone using the current TLS options to use a Reverse Proxy for TLS termination instead if at all possible, as this provides a number of benefits
It's difficult to say exactly what all a reverse proxy adds to the security conversation for a handful of reasons, so I won't touch on that, but the realistic risk of exposing your jellyfin instance to the internet is about the same as handing your jellyfin api over to every stranger globally without giving them your user account or password and letting them do whatever they'd like for as long as they'd like. This means any undiscovered or unintentional vulnerability in the api implementation could easily allow for security bypass or full rce (remote code execution, real examples of this can be found by looking at the history of WordPress), but by siloing it behind a vpn you're far far far more secure because the internet at large cannot access the apis even if there is a known vulnerability. I'm not saying exposing jellyfin to the raw web is so risky it shouldn't be done, but don't buy into the misconception that it's even nearly as secure as running a vpn. They're entirely different classes of security posture and it should be acknowledged that if you don't have actual use for internet level access to jellyfin (external users, etc, etc) a vpn like tailscale or zero tier is 100% best practice.
The issue is not encryption, it's the unauthenticated API. People can interact with your server without an account.
Anyone wanna yell at me for being an idiot and doing everything wrong?
Not yell, but: Jellyfin is dropping HTTPS support with a future update so you might want to read up on reverse proxies before then.
Additionally, you might want to check if Shodan has your Jellyfin instance listed: https://www.shodan.io/
It feels like everything is a tradeoff and I think a setup like this reduces the complexity for people you share with.
If you added fail2ban along with alert email/notifications you could have a chance to react if you were ever targeted for a brute force attempt. Jellyfin docs talk about setting this up for anyone interested.
Blocking IP segments based on geography of countries you don't expect connections from adds the cost of a VPN for malicious actors in those areas.
Giving Jellyfin its own VLAN on your network could help limit exposure to your other services and devices if you experience a 0day or are otherwise compromised.
Fail2ban isn't going to help you when jellyfin has vulnerable endpoints that need no authentication at all.
Nah, setting non-standard ports is sound advice in security circles.
People misunderstand the "no security through obscurity" phrase. If you build security as a chain, where the chain is only as good as the weakest link, then it's bad. But if you build security in layers, like a castle, then it can only help. It's OK for a layer to be weak when there are other layers behind it.
Even better, non-standard ports will make 99% of threats go away. They automate scans that are just looking for anything they can break. If they don't see the open ports, they move on. Won't stop a determined attacker, of course, but that's what other layers are for.
As long as there's real security otherwise (TLS, good passwords, etc), it's fine.
If anyone says "that's a false sense of security", ignore them. They've replaced thinking with a cliche.
I think the reason why its generally suggested to use a VPN is because it reduces the risk of intrusion to almost zero. Folks that are not network/sys admin savy would feel safer with the lowest risk solution. Using the port forward method, there could be configuration mistakes made which would unintentionally expose a different service or parts of their home network they don't want exposed. And then there's the possibility of application vulnerabilities which is less of an issue when only VPN users can access the application. That being said, I do expose some services via port forwarding but that's only because I'm comfortable with ensuring its secure.
Reverse proxy is really useful when you have more than one service to expose to the internet because you only have to expose one port. It also automates the certificate creation & simplifies firewall rules inside the home network
Cheap VPS with Pangolin for Wireguard and reverse proving through the tunnel.
I just use tailscale. I am thinking about external share options but for me and my closests just plain simple tailscale
I rent a cheap $5/mo VPS and use it to run a wireguard server with wgeasy and nginx proxy manager. Everything else runs on my home server connected by wireguard.
Use a reverse proxy (caddy or nginx proxy manager) with a subdomain, like myservice.mydomain.com (maybe even configure a subdir too, so …domain.com/guessthis/). Don’t put anything on the main domain / root dir / the IP address.
If you’re still unsure setup Knockd to whitelist only IP addresses that touch certain one or two random ports first.
So security through obscurity :) But good luck for the bots to figure all that out.
VPN is of course the actually secure option, I’d vote for Tailscale.
Tailscale - funnel
Just that
Tailscale, with nginx for https.
Very easy, very simple, just works, and i can share my jellyfin server with my friends
An $11/yr domain pointed at my IP. Port 443 is open to nginx, which proxies to the desired service depending on subdomain. (and explicitly drops any connection that uses my raw ip or an unrecognized name to connect, without responding at all)
ACME.sh automatically refreshes my free ssl certificate every ~2months via DNS-01 verification and letsencrypt.
And finally, I've got a dynamic IP, so DDClient keeps my domain pointed at the correct IP when/if it changes.
There's also pihole on the local network, replacing the WAN IP from external DNS, with the servers local IP, for LAN devices to use. But that's very much optional, especially if your router performs NAT Hairpinning.
This setup covers all ~24 of the services/web applications I host, though most other services have some additional configuration to make them only accessible from LAN/VPN despite using the same ports and nginx service. I can go into that if there's interest.
Only Emby/Jellyfin, Ombi, and Filebrowser are made accessible from WAN; so I can easily share those with friends/family without having to guide them through/restrict them to a vpn connection.
Over the top for security would be to setup a personal VPN and only watch it over the VPN. If you are enabling other users and you don't want them on your network; using a proxy like nginx is the way.
Being new to this I would look into how to set these things up in docker using docker-compose.
I have had Jellyfin directly open to the Internet with a reverse proxy for years. No problems.
If your reverse proxy only acknowledges jellyfin exists if the hostname is correct, you won't get discovered by an IP scanner.
Mine's on jellyfin.[domain].com and you get a completely different page if you hit it by IP address.
If it does get found, there's also a fail2ban to rate-limit someone brute-forcing a login.
I've always exposed my home IP to the internet. Haven't had an issue in the last 15 years. I'm running about 10 public-facing services including NTP and SMTP.
Please to see: https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/5415
Someone doesn't necessarily have to brute Force a login if they know about pre-existing vulnerabilities, that may be exploited in unexpected ways