this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
478 points (99.2% liked)

Selfhosted

49464 readers
699 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Who benefits from this? Even though Let’s Encrypt stresses that most site operators will do fine sticking with ordinary domain certificates, there are still scenarios where a numeric identifier is the only practical choice:

Infrastructure services such as DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) – where clients may pin a literal IP address for performance or censorship-evasion reasons.
IoT and home-lab devices – think network-attached storage boxes, for example, living behind static WAN addresses.
Ephemeral cloud workloads – short-lived back-end servers that spin up with public IPs faster than DNS records can propagate.
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I would read layman discussions about why this (by context?) is good.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Domains need to be registered annually and DNS servers are needed to route traffic to them. But using an IP directly, you don't need to worry about domain registration issues that can brick your systems, and you don't have to worry about DNS providers knowing about your traffic (or maintaining your own private dns).

If it's not a user trying in a memorable domain, an IP serves much better.

[–] comrade_twisty@feddit.org 120 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Can I get a cert for 127.0.0.1 ? /s

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 6 days ago

This would actually be useful for local testing of software during development.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 107 points 1 week ago (2 children)

How many bits is a /s mask?

[–] lando55@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 3 points 1 week ago

Is that the same i as the squareroot of -1?

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 45 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The down votes are from people who work in IT support that have to deal with idiots that play with things they dont understand.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It’s unfortunate they don’t know what /s means

It obviously means "secure"

[–] fatalicus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

We do, it's just that those users will also often go "nah, I'm just joking!" then do some shit anyways.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

How do I setup a reverse proxy for pure TCP? /s

[–] Laser@feddit.org 15 points 1 week ago

Think that's called NATing

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

nah, I was once an idiot who didn't understand so idgaf

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you can get their servers to connect to that IP under your control, you've earned it

[–] comrade_twisty@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago

Nothing a ski mask and a little mission impossible can’t fix :)

[–] AliasVortex@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That's kind of awesome! I have a bunch of home lab stuff, but have been putting off buying a domain (I was a broke college student when I started my lab and half the point was avoiding recurring costs- plus I already run the DNS, as far as the WAN is concerned, I have whatever domain I want). My loose plan was to stand up a certificate authority and push the root public key out with active directory, but being able to certify things against Let's Encrypt might make things significantly easier.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

FYI you can get a numeric xyz domain for 1$ a year

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At least for the first year.

[–] clb92@feddit.dk 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Pretty sure it remains $1. But it's specifically only 6-9 digit numeric .xyz domains.

[–] oasis@piefed.social 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Setting up a root and a immediate CA is significantly more fun though ;) It's also teaches you more about PKI which is a good skill to have.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

but for the love of god and your own benefit, put a name constraint directly on the root cert

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I use a domain, but for homelab I eventually switched to my own internal CA.

Instead of having to do service.domain.tld it's nice to do service.lan.

[–] martin@lemmy.caliban.io 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Any good instructions you would recommend for doing this?

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 week ago

I just use openssl"s built in management. I have scripts that set it up and generate a .lan domain, and instructions for adding it to clients. I could make a repo and writeup if you would like?

As the other commenter pointed out, .lan is not officially sanctioned for local use, but it is not used publicly and is a common choice. However you could use whatever you want.

[–] eneff@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

use the official home.arpa as specified in RFC 8375

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 1 week ago (5 children)

No thanks. I get some people agreed to this, but I'm going to continue to use .lan, like so many others. If they ever register .lan for public use, there will be a lot of people pissed off.

IMO, the only reason not to assign a top-level domain in the RFC is so that some company can make money on it. The authors were from Cisco and Nominum, a DNS company purchased by Akamai, but that doesnt appear to be the reason why. .home and .homenet were proposed, but this is from the mailing list:

  1. we cannot be sure that using .home is consistent with the existing (ab)use
  2. ICANN is in receipt of about a dozen applications for ".home", and some of those applicants no doubt have deeper pockets than the IETF does should they decide to litigate

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/PWl6CANKKAeeMs1kgBP5YPtiCWg/

So, corporate fear.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Allero@lemmy.today 16 points 1 week ago (7 children)

F I N A L L Y

Now tell me it supports IPv6 and I'll be the happiest man alive

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Its like self signed certs with the convience of a third party

[–] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

Maybe kinda, but it's also a third party whose certificates are almost if not entirely universally trusted. Self-signed certs cause software to complain unless you also spread a root certificate to be trusted to any machine that might use one of your self-signed certs.

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This could go a long way towards fighting online censorship. One less issue when an authoritarian overreach gets your domain seized. Pretty awesome.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Would this work with a public dynamic DNS?

[–] SteveTech@programming.dev 12 points 1 week ago

With dynamic DNS? Yeah it always has, as long as you can host a http server.

With a dynamic IP? It should do, the certs are only valid for 6 days for that reason.

load more comments
view more: next ›