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
If it’s just so you personally can access it away from home, use tailscale. Less risky than running a publicly exposed server.
Jellyfin isn't secure and is full of holes.
That said, here's how to host it anyway.
If you aren't using Tailscale, make your VPS your main hub for whatever you choose, pihole, wg-easy, etc. Connect the proxy to Jellyfin through your chosen tunnel, with ssl, Caddy makes it easy.
Since Jellyfin isn't exactly secure, secure it. Give it its own user and make sure your media isn't writable by the user. Inconvenient for deleting movies in the app, but better for security.
more...
Use fail2ban to stop intruders after failed login attempts, you can force fail2ban to listen in on jellyfin's host for failures and block ips automatically.
More!
Use Anubis and yes, I can confirm Anubis doesn't intrude Jellyfin connectivity and just works, connect it to fail2ban and you can cook your own ddos protection.
MORE!
SELinux. Lock Jellyfin down. Lock the system down. It's work but it's worth it.
I SAID MORE!
There's a GeoIP blocking plugin for Caddy that you can use to limit Jellyfin's access to your city, state, hemisphere, etc. You can also look into whitelisting in Caddy if everyone's IP is static. If not, ddns-server and a script to update Caddy every round? It can get deep.
Again, don't do any of this and just use Jellyfin over wireguard like everyone else does(they don't).
Wow, a "for dummies" guide for doing all this would be great 😊 know of any?
OpenVPN into my own LAN. Stream from there to my device.
Is putting it behind an Oauth2 proxy and running the server in a rootless container enough?
Tailscale + Caddy (automatic certificates FTW).
Synology worked for me. They have built in reverse proxy. As well as good documentation to install it on their machine. Just gotta configure your wifi router to port forward your device and bam you're ready to rock and roll
Didn’t they patch their things now that your stuck in their bubble/environment now or something like that ?
I just install tailscale at family houses. The limit is 100 machines.
I'm just using caddy and a cheap $2 a year .top domain with a $4 a month VPS. Works for my users, I only have 3 users on my server.
Tailscale
OpenVPN into my router
Jellyfin through a traefik proxy, with a WAF as middleware and brute force login protected by fail2ban
Wireguard.
and a local reverse proxy that can route through wireguard when you want to watch on a smart tv.
its not as complicated as it sounds, it's just a wireguard client, and a reverse proxy like on the main server.
it can even be your laptop, without hdmi cables
You can also use a router that can run wireguard/openvpn and have that run the tunnel back to home for you. I've got a portable GL-Inet router with OpenWRT that I use for this when I'm on the road
I use a cloudflare tunnel, ISP won't give me a static IP and I wanna keep my firewall locked down tight.
Cheap VPS with Pangolin for Wireguard and reverse proving through the tunnel.
Wireguard vpn into my home router. Works on android so fire sticks etc can run the client.
I just use tailscale. I am thinking about external share options but for me and my closests just plain simple tailscale
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.
Youve minimized login risk, but not any 0 days or newly discovered vulnerabilites in your ssh server software. Its still best to not directly expose any ports you dont need to regularly interact with to the internet.
Also, Look into crowdsec as a fail2ban replacement. Its uses automatically crowdsourced info to pre block IPs. A bit more proactive compared to abuseipdb manual reporting.
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.
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.
You remember when LastPass had a massive leak and it out of their production source code which demonstrated that their encryption security was horrible? That was a Plex vulnerability. All it takes is a zero day and one of the packages they're using and you're a prime target for ransomware.
You can see from the number of unauthenticated processes in their security backlog that security really has been an afterthought.
Unless you're running in a non-privileged container with read only media, I definitely would not put that out on the open network.
Jellyfin has a whole host of unresolved and unmitigated security vulnerabilities that make exposing it to the internet. A pretty poor choice.
And which one of those are actually vulnerabilities that are exploitable? First, yes ofc unauthenticated endpoints should be fixed, but with those there is no real damage to be done.
If you know the media path then you can request a playback, and if you get the user ids then you can get all users. That's more or less it.
Good? No. But far from making it a poor choice exposing it.
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/
Jellyfin is dropping HTTPS support with a future update[...]
What's the source for this? I wasn't able to find anything with a quick google search
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.
Your comment got me looking through the jellyfin github issues. Are the bugs listed for unauthenticated endpoints what you're referencing? It looks like the 7 open mention being able to view information about the jellyfin instance or view the media itself. But this is just what was commented as possible, there could be more possibilities especially if combined with other vulnerabilities.
Now realizing there are parts of Jellyfin that are known to be accessible without authentication, I'm thinking Fail2ban is going to do less but unless there are ways to do injection with the known bugs/a new 0day they will still need to brute force a password to be able to make changes. I'm curious if there is anything I'm overlooking.
