• teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    If I say I custom rolled my own crypto and it’s designed to be deployed to the open web, and you inspect it and don’t see anything wrong, should you do it?

    Jellyfin is young and still in heavy development. As time goes on, more eyes have seen it, and it’s been battle hardened, the security naturally gets stronger and the risk lower. I don’t agree that no one should ever host a public jellyfin server for all time, but for right now, it should be clear that you’re assuming obvious risk.

    Technically there’s no real problem here. Just like with any vulnerability in any service that’s exposed in some way, as long as you update right now you’re (probably) fine. I just don’t want staying on top of it to be a full time job, so I limit my attack surface by using a VPN.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I don’t care if someone finds my instance and manages to guess a random number to stream some random movie. Good for them I guess it would be easier to just download it themselves.

    • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Young.

      The original ticket is 2019. That’s 7 years ago.

      Technically there’s no real problem here.

      It responds to and serves content to unauthenticated requests. That’s sorta table stakes if you’re creating an authenticated web service and providing guides to set it up with a reverse proxy.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Ok, I misread what you were linking to. Yeah, that’s pretty bad to allow actual streaming of content to unauthed users. I agree they should not be encouraging anyone to set this up to be publicly accessible until those are fixed. Or at least add a warning.