Afraid people will use known vulnerabilities in common self-hosted software.

So every answer is as good as you can get?

I’m afraid of security bugs in the software I’m using, so that containers don’t contain, read-only doesn’t prevent writing, mounting directories doesn’t restrict access to those directories, etc.

I’m a nobody, I can’t imagine anyone targeting me or my random domain, but I can imagine getting swept up in a net of attacks of opportunities targeting hosted software with known vulnerabilities, or injected supply chain vulnerabilities, so I want to reduce my attack surface as much as I can (while still actually letting the people I want to access it actually access it)

I’m kinda disappointed with this thread, I’m in a similar position to OP, but all the responses are just like “use a reverse proxy and make your URL hard to guess” and other measures which are not very secure. \

It seems like that’s about as good as you can get at the moment, because the mobile apps barf if you try to add in auth in front of the reverse proxy, but a lot of people seem to be providing this advice like it’s good enough rather than as good as you can get.

Some reverse proxies have an authentication layer.
But this typically breaks the jellyfin Mobile app.

Idk if geo whitelisting is really good enough. I can’t speak for OP, but I’m in the same position and I don’t. I had high hopes for the post but everyone seems to just brush over the “secure” part

How do you get the mobile app to connect?

If bosses are the ones who give you jobs, then bosses are the ones who take the jobs.

If immigrants are the ones who took your jobs, then bosses were never the ones who gave you jobs.

So either immigrants didn’t take your job, or billionaires don’t create jobs. You can’t have both. God I wish redpills could connect their own dots.

This would imply they’re surprised to see each other doing what they’re doing, which they absolutely aren’t

Obviously the second option.
How would he ever get dat ass into the pants? Be realistic, OP

The other time should be deleted before I posted this one, because I forgot the “40s”

deleted by creator

One of the big controversies is that these companies do have access to cameras on private property, using things like ring doorbell cameras.
And depending on conditions, you can still track the movement of something smaller than a pixel. Smaller than a pixel doesn’t mean invisible, it affects the color of that pixel and you can track the movement of the disrupted pixel.
And you have to actually get close enough you the camera lens to damage it, so there is continuity; they’re not just looking at a strange color pixel and leaping to the conclusion that it is a drone, they see the drone flying off into the distance (in reverse) and cross reference it with other cameras to track the movement at a distance.

It’s a lot of effort, but protecting the investments of the wealthy is one of the only things that will mobilize both the finances of the wealthy and the actual effort of the police.

I mean if they can track a car around the city using their cameras, they can probably do the same for a drone. Even if you fly up out of view they could look for drones in a radius flying down into view and connect the dots.

That’s an expensive way to get rid of a single camera, and they could theoretically track a drone around the city like they track people, and they’d track it back to you.

Fair

Possibly, but I don’t wanna risk my freedom on them being incompetent rather than corrupt.

Idk, I think they can probably do a reasonable job tracing a drone back to it’s takeoff location, and then tracking the person who brought it there back to their home, with decent coverage.

That said I don’t know if I’m overestimating their ability regarding machine learning and AI - this is probably fairly labour intensive unless they’ve done a good job preparing all their data and they have plenty of compute.