this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
657 points (99.0% liked)

Selfhosted

58291 readers
427 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.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Damarus@feddit.org 12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I'd rather just not use it at that point

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

you are better just closing up shop then, because it's not like the other services you are hosting are much better. vulnerabilities being discovered don't mean they don't exist, it just means the software is not popular enough or too complex for someone to look into it

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

lol the whole internet better shut down right? Too vulnerable

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works -5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

much of the internet is run on simpler software or by full time employees tasked to deal with all this. but sure, ignorance is bliss, what you don't see does not exist, etc etc, keep running your Jellyfin exposed to the internet. you wouldnt even get to know when your system is compromised. but you know what? you could even remove your password for extra convenience. who would want to log in to a random jellyfin account anyway! surely no one! just don't recommend these practices to anyone, because you are putting them at risk.

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I mean I do this stuff for a living but okay go off king

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works -3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

would not ever use your services in that case

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

wow not just totally unprofessional, but even downvoting the calling out the lack of credible security! you can be ashamed of yourself, and hope that your clients never find out you are a contrarian

I really doubt your work has anything to do with computers

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You're hilarious. I haven't downvoted you, others are reading these threads as well.

Talking about security... Have you heard of intrusion detection, process isolation, or principle of least privilege?

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Talking about security... Have you heard of intrusion detection, process isolation, or principle of least privilege?

are you aware that the very popular official docker image for jellyfin still runs the jellyfin process as root? or that most people just mount their media libraries as a read-write volume because they don't know better?

I would also be very interested about statistics on how many jellyfin admins run intrusion detection software on their system, if you have any.

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not running my stuff as root if I don't have to. You're moving goalposts

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

"if I don't have to". and, is your jellyfin running as root? or are you running it a different way, e.g. from apt package (where I believe it's sensible by default)? I smell doubt.

but in either case it does not matter how do you run jellyfin. what I care is how many other people are running jellyfin exposed to the internet because they think its safe, because people on forums told them so, with the popular docker image where it is being ran as root.

I'm not moving goalposts. I'm still firmly besides my point that for the general jellyfin admin exposing jellyfin to the wide internet is unsafe and irresponsible. and seeing all the downvotes but no one else telling their opinion, it seems no one knows better either and they are just angry I pointed this out.
again, I don't care how are you running Jellyfin. I don't want to convince you on that, you do whats best for you, it seems you might have done some precautions. what I care is to not recommend these practices to others (without the full picture), because they are unsafe, especially without further precautions like running a(n unofficial) rootless jellyfin docker image and an intrusion detection system, which I guarantee most people won't have.

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 1 points 22 hours ago

I had my fun with you but this is becoming increasingly annoying