this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
81 points (96.6% liked)

Selfhosted

39472 readers
557 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
81
Selfhost wiki (personal) (wiki.gardiol.org)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by Shimitar@feddit.it to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
 

I have finally got my selfhost wiki up to a satisfying shape. Its here: https://wiki.gardiol.org

Take a look i hope it can help somebody.

I am open to any suggestions about it.

Note: the most original part is the one about multi-homed routing and failbacks and advanced routing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (11 children)

Thanks for sharing, very cool stuff in there and great job ! Bookmarked !

While reading through your reverse proxy concept post, I think this statement is wrong:

As a sub-domain:
- Cons: require additional certificates for HTTPS/SSL for each sub-domain

There are actually wildcard SAN certificates where you can access all your subdomains with a single certificate: https://*.mydomain.com

Or you can add all your subdomains in a single certificate.

Great work and thanks for sharing !

[–] TheHolm@aussie.zone 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)

using wildcards is really bad security practice. and at age of ACME absolutely unnecessary.

[–] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

That's true. But it doesn't take away the possibility to use them in a selfhosted environnement.

Large enteprises like facebook and google still use them, but they have the backing to secure them safely.

Also, there is always the possibilty to add all subdomains in one certificate which takes away the wildcard subdomains.

[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate on why it is a bad security practice? It's the first time I'm reading about it and I'd like to read more about it. Thanks!

[–] Shimitar@feddit.it 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

One of the risks associated with wildcard SSL certificates is the increased attack surface they introduce. If one subdomain becomes compromised, it opens the door for potential attackers to gain unauthorized access to all subdomains secured under the wildcard certificate. (first google link)

[–] cron@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

While this argument is valid for a larger domain, it doesn't really matter for the small selfhoster.

[–] Shimitar@feddit.it 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Using let's encrypt certbot is so easy and automated that I never bothered for wildcards anyway, so.

[–] lorentz@feddit.it 1 points 7 months ago

The advantage of wildcard certificates is that you don't have to expose each single subdomain over internet. Which is great if you want to have https on local only subdomains.

[–] Shimitar@feddit.it 1 points 7 months ago
load more comments (7 replies)