EDIT no wait, this post is about secure, not hosting/tunneling in general. This comment is off topic ig.

I would like to avoid paying for a VPS

Oracle cloud free tier, but it does have a history of randomly killing the VPS’s created.

Public ipv4 addresses are scarce, and becoming more expensive now. You are probably going to have to shell out some cash if you don’t already get one as part of your internet plan.

https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/unstable/#trivial-builder-writeShellApplication

What reverse proxy are you using?

Tailscale works great, but their free tier is limited to a total of 8 users, which is enough for a tiny minecraft server, but doesn’t seem to be enough for your usecase.

For 10-15+ users, you probably want to self host a VPN on your own VPS. Like, you can self host headscale, which is tailscale but self hosted. : https://github.com/juanfont/headscale [1]

I wouldn’t port forward game servers, because they often lack authentication (login and stuff), and then they also have security issues due to not receiving updates. If your game server isn’t truly public, then it’s easier to just have people use the tailscale client to connect to your VPN.

[1] Although I would recommend headscale to OP for it’s simplicity, it is very barebones, and software like netbird or netmaker is more close to a truly self hosted tailscale, with things like more advanced accounts, OIDC integration, authorization, and so on. But they are more annoying to host and set up.

No, firefox doesn’t implement the webusb standard which they probably want.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebUSB_API

The problem here is not browser support, but them not shipping a native application or library (which I would want to be open source).

Do nix and then use nix2appimage, or nix bundle to package the app compressed as an arx archive without the startup times they complain about.

You can also use https://github.com/DavHau/nix-portable to bundle it a bit better, without needing nix on the host.

And then, based off a quick search:

https://github.com/neobrain/nix2flatpak

https://github.com/barstoolbluz/nix2deb

I couldn’t find nix2rpm or nix2pacman, but there exist tools to convert between formats (alien, debtap, rpmtap, and one more who’s name I can’t remember but I remeber as being the most versatile).

What I’m trying to say, is that when people said “just use nix”, they probably really mean to use nix as a platform to build other packages withouth doing extra work.

On the other hand,

You can also use one of the newfangled appimage like formats: https://docs.pkgforge.dev/formats/packages

This one is linked in there and creates a static executable from any binary: https://github.com/VHSgunzo/sharun

Now they would still have to build for macos and windows, but they are already doing that anyways.

As a sidenote, there is also this: https://github.com/pacur/pacur , which is an aur like repo that buids debs, rpm’s, and pacman packages. So there’s semi-automatic updates, via a publuc repo you can out stuff on.

The real elite solution, imo, is to host forgejo, or use codeberg, which insanely has a package registry for every possible format of packages. So you can directly just push there, after building however you want.

But if developer’s were good at packaging, I wouldn’t be so mad when they try to do it.

Because this:

The next version will include a new built-in self-updating mechanism

Downloading unsigned, unverified binaries directly from the latest versioned github release?

Makes it so that all that’s needed for getting malware on the system is pwning the developers account via some supply chain malware, that hooks into there browser and pushes a release.

And every additional developer who can release, or every github actions that is potentially vulnerable but can be made to release, or claude (since the author is letting it commit, which requires it to run without sandboxing afaik) becomes more attack surface.

There are ways to fix this. Conventional distros use multi party signing of commits and releases, where developers continously verify eachother and look over changes.

More newfangled flows involve using github actions to build immutable releases, directly from tagged versions of the code.

But random developer #3989 isn’t doing this. They are distributing their software in a way that malware distributors will be ery happy to see after pwning their account.

I want devs to use nix, because then I can build or run their program directly from the source code. It sidesteps so many issues with visibility of the supply chain, or being unable to inspect what I am running.

I like nix becuase I can make developers like the above satisfied by giving them a way to easily build static binaries, or other formats.

Nix is also packaged in debian as nix-bin.

A common distribution method involves multi-party signing, that is, multiple developers use keys to sign off on reviewed changes.

Multiple developers review the changes, before signing the git commit after review. Then they build the package, either locally or on CI servers, but again, multiple parties/servers sign and review, doing a reproducible build to verify across machines.

In an ideal architecture, there is never a single point of failure. You would have to compromise the computers of multiple devs, or multiple build servers that are building signed reproducible builds, in order to do it.

Although in theory, you could compromise all of them. But it’s extremely difficult.

Anyway I was gonna write a rant about it but I’m too tired. But basically the docker ecosystem is kinda fucked in this regard, and trades security in many aspects for convenience of development and distribution. This is one of the most notable examples of this.

It’s popular because it’s convinient and easy to use in many ways. If these pitfalls are a dealbreaker for you, then there is no trivial way to add the security requirements you are asking for.

You can pay for signed images from someone else, which is a little better, but there are still disadvantages.

Also what are you building? You might be able to replace docker with nix for example.

I think the most popular solution is locally building and registry.

The version you get from Debian does respect all four freedoms.

The version that is installable from the repositories of Linux distros is all open source. Docker itself, the container engine and runtime are all open source. Nobody cares about stuff like docker desktop or docker sbx, not only are they not critical to the software itself, they aren’t that useful or valuable.

Docker is foss. Docker desktop and docker sbx are not.

What do you use for notes and file/note syncing?

Also backups?

Is your comment supposed to say “native pf or nftables”?

Yes, I do lock it down. It’s still worth securing it because “internal servers” can still get exposed and touched, even though there are less paths to them, and it’s not as punishing to slip up vs a public server. For example, One of the wireguard client devices downloads a virus, and now you have a cyberattacker with access.

Another problem is supply chain issues. If the distributor of a docker container is hacked, it’s not that bad… as long as your kernel is up to date and is protected against some of the recent vulns, that would enable someone to break out of a docker container

Blajah.zone’s lemmy instance was hacked partially becuase internal servers weren’t being held to the same security standards as the public ones:

https://pen.blahaj.zone/supakaity/weve-been-hacked

I had not patched these internal servers that nobody should have access to against this. Rebooting DB servers causes downtime, and in my hubris – I thought nobody should (nay COULD) be on my servers except me, right?

I have a comment on that post with some potential solutions, that would have cut off attack paths.

Though, I guess, it still does depend. Like if it’s just gonna you wireguarding in and no one else, then the data on your devices is probably worth more than the data on the server, so no, it wouldn’t be worth spending too much effort to secure less valuable data.

But if you are handing out internal access to people, including to some relative who keeps falling for scammers, then yeah, I’d take some time to harden the systems.

https://programming.dev/comment/24515044

Same problem is present here. Uses JWT’s for auth.

Edit:

Using jwt’s for auth isn’t bad, it’s good and quite common The problem is when they are used in place of actual bearer/cookie/session auth methods. As I understand it at least, a jwt token with a lifespan greater than 5 minutes is a red flag.

I used to use innoextract to extract the launchers, and the the system wine to run it. Although sometimes I have to run extra installers that put dlls in the right spots.

You should probably just run the installer in lutris (which ships a proton distributution) or bottles.

Edit: I can’t read smh my head.

Check this out: https://github.com/lutris/docs/blob/2b116519c5b67254733234f36ab33a60f14f1358/WineDependencies.md

I don’t use a UI.

I don’t use flux’s kustomize (there is also kustomize by kubernetes.

I use flux for installing helm charts, mostly.

Repo: https://github.com/moonpiedumplings/flux-config

It’s not up right now though. I am currently revamping it, which will also involve reorganizing the repo. I really dislike that I didn’t use (flux’s) kustomize, which is one of the things I would like to fix.

I’m on my phone rn, if I get to this post again from my computer later I will add longer/further thoughts.