this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Self-Hosted Main

504 readers
1 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.

For Example

We welcome posts that include suggestions for good self-hosted alternatives to popular online services, how they are better, or how they give back control of your data. Also include hints and tips for less technical readers.

Useful Lists

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Reason for my question is the following:
I want to host some services on my public server and while they all have normal password protection, I want to ensure the security a tiny bit more. Therefore I want to limit the access to the specific services through ufw and nginx to specific IP addresses. For my homeaddress I can use DYNDNS to get my current IP. However that will not work for my phone, when I'm on the go.
I don't want to constantly use vpn, as it slows down the speed of the internet connection significantly. Instead I would much prefer to just simply keep my server updated on my phones IP, so I can update the necessary config files through a script and thus allow my phone to access the services, where ever I am.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] tech2but1@alien.top 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The correct answer has been given a few times here, split tunnelling.

But your idea is mental. If your IP changes and access is locked down by IP address how do you expect your phone to connect to your server to tell it about the new IP if it can;t access the server due to the fact it hasn't got the correct IP in the allow list?

[โ€“] Soraster@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah I thought about this problem. I don't want to lock down all ports for nginx, but instead only certain websites through nginx rules.
The webhook receiver would remain open to the public, but would require a long passphrase that would result in ban through fail2ban, if entered incorrectly.

I know this isn't ideal, but that's what I had in mind, when thinking about the problem.