Selfhosted

40198 readers

597 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:

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:

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!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

NAS vulnerabilities (www.theregister.com)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by Cyber@feddit.uk to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Just stumbled across this (overly dramatic?) article and thought I'd just post it here...

It's more to act as a reminder that if you've got a NAS that is serving content to the interwebs, then make sure it's behind a proxy of some kind to prevent weaknesses (ie in the management Web UI) being exposed.

Obvz, this article is pointing to Zyxel, but it could be your DIY home-built NAS with Cockpit: CVE-2024-2947 - just an example, not bashing that project at all.

I've used Squid and HAProxy over the years (mostly on my pfSense box) - but I'd be interested to know if there's other options that I've not heard of

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

As someone who isn't a fan of e-waste, I really hate these little "appliance" type NASes. Companies abandon them while they're still perfectly usable and meeting someone's needs, and tell you oh sorry, I guess you should buy a new one and throw your current one away. (Which, annoyingly, the article also does.)

[–] HumanPerson@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I agree, though I wouldn't blame the article. If it is insecure, you shouldn't be using it unless it is set up to allow you to run a real os on it.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I mean I'm not blaming anyone other than the manufacturers who make things and then arbitrarily decide to stop supporting them while they're still perfectly usable, leaving basically no choice other than trashing and buying a new one.

[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 3 points 4 months ago

Agreed.

If the hardware's standard, then it's possible for people (us) to keep these things out of the ground / incinerator for a few more years, but if it's custom / proprietary stuff, then that's just terrible.

[–] peregus@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Totally agree! Also, at work we have some Synology and their web UI is soooo slow that it's almost unusable