this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
296 points (93.5% liked)

Selfhosted

39980 readers
775 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.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Centralization is bad for everyone everywhere.

That bring said... I just moved my homeserver to another city... and I plugged in the power, then I plugged in the ethernet, and that was the whole shebang.

Tunnels made it very easy. No port forwarding no dns configuration no firewall fiddling no nothing.

Why do they have to make it so so easy...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] maiskanzler@feddit.de 28 points 4 months ago (23 children)

Sure it's easy to set up, but the same behaviour is what I get with my handrolled solution. I rent a cheap VPS with a fixed IP solely for forwarding all traffic through wireguard. My DNS entries all point to the VPS and my servers connect to the VPS to be reachable. It is absolutely network agnostic and does not require any port shenanigans on the local network nor does it require a fixed IP for the internet connection of my home server.

Data security wise the HTTPS terminates on my own hardware (homeserver with reverse proxy) and the wireguard connection is additionally encrypted. There are no secrets or certificates on the rented VPS beyond the bare minimum for the wireguard tunnel and my public key for SSH access.

Shuttling the packets on the VPS (inet to wireguard) is done by socat because I haven't had the will or need to get in the weeds with nftables/iptables. I am just happy that it works reliably and am happy to loose some potential bandwidth to the kernelspace/userspace hoops.

[–] madasi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 months ago (13 children)

Does this cause all traffic at the reverse proxy to appear to come from the source IP of your VPS or does it preserve the original source IP?

I've been working on setting up a similar setup myself and am trying to figure out specifically how to handle the forwarding on the VPS.

[–] lucky18391@lemdro.id 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

I also have a similar setup to maiskanzler. But I use iptables to forward the traffic over wireguard and I am able to preserve the original client IP by not snat the packets. I then have to use policy based routing to make sure that traffick goes back out through the wg tunnel.

I'm happy to share info on how to get this working.

[–] madasi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 months ago

I'd certainly be interested in full details. This sounds like the best of all worlds of not needing to double reverse proxy, not hardcoding internal IPs in the config of a single reverse proxy on the VPS, and not losing the source IP.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)