Well if your reverse proxy is also inside of a container, you dont need to expose the port at all. As long as the containers are in the same docker network then they can communicate.
If your reverse proxy is not inside a docker container, then yes this method would work to prevent clients from connecting to a docker container.
Something like this. This is a compose.yml that only allows ips from the local host 8080 to connect to the container port 80.
services:
webapp:
image: nginx:latest
container_name: local_nginx
ports:
- "127.0.0.1:8080:80"
Ooo I do love me some Nix modules. Any particular options to look out for in order to configure something like that?
Edit:
It’s programs.chromium.extraOpts isnt it? Lol
You can setup wild card certs with a DNS challenge using traefik. No plug-ins needed, works right out the box.
Personally, I quite prefer traefik. Its harder to use than Caddy but offers more features. Also, it uses yaml or docker labels for config. I’m not a fan of the nginx .conf format.
The routers or computers you are using for this have to support forwarding traffic. With Linux this is pretty straight forward for other OSes I’m not sure how easy it is.
You can get around this by having tailscale installed on the default gateway (router) of each network. It might be quite a pain for OP to change routers at each location. On the plus side, OpenWRT has some other cool features like PXE booting.
Ahhh interesting video! I appreciate the post. I see the mTLS is more about authenticating who the client is outside the application.
Don’t worry, Im not just exposing thing willy nilly 🤣 For client-side authentication I use Authentik combined with 2FA, Duo, and fail2ban. Authentik provides identity management through LDAP to jellyfin and any sign in request goes to MFA and you get a Duo notification to approve. You can do other MFA, i just havent set it up.
Ive got a lot of family who use my server. Asking them to install a TSL cert on every machine would be impossible. My method also monitors all sign in requests. Setting up Authentik was a hugggeee game changer for me.
Well ya know this is a forum and I was trying to engage in a friendly conversation to learn about something you brought up.
But yeah I know how to fucking Google lol
Oooo ya know I actually don’t know about these. I’ve done both A and B for my homelab and C for work.
Any good resources / insight into mTLS? I appreciate the response btw!
Ya got three options.
Option A is to create your own certificate that is self-signed. You will then have to load the certificate into any client you want to use. Easier than people realize, just a couple terminal commands. Give this a go if you want to learn how they work.
Option B is to generate a certificate with Let’s Encrypt via an application like certbot. I suggest you use a DNS challenge to create a wildcard certificate.
Option C is to buy a certificate from your DNS provider aka something like cloudflare.
IMO the best is Option B. Takes a bit to figure it out but its free and rotates automatically which I like.
I like helping and fixing stuff, if you’d like to know anything just ask :D
I wish I had setup an identity management system sooner. Been self-hosting for years and about a year ago took the full plunge into setting up all my services behind Authentik. Its a game changer not having to deal with all the usernames and passwords.
In a similar vein, before Authentik, I used Vaultwarden to manage all my credentials. That was also a huge game changer with my significant other. Being able to have them setup their own account and then share credentials as an organization is super handy.
Thats just how IPv6 works. You get a delegate address from your ISP for your router and then any device within that gets it own unique address. Considering how large the pool is, all address are unique. No NAT means no port forwarding needed!
The rules still apply to the host, just not inside the container. Docker is just ignoring the rules. If you block all ports but then have port 81 open like you do in that section of docker compose, you would think that UFW would block docker but thats not the case. Going to http://yourip:81/ will show then NPM gui, even if you specifically use ufw to block 81. If you only expose port 80 and 443, you should be fine. Your NPM container would have to be compromised then they would have to break out of the container.
Also I think your issue is with your DNS. You should have an A record for the IP pointing to example.com and then a CNAME record pointing to sub.example.com
Docker completely ignores UFW rules. If you check your ip tables you’ll see docker rules are put in before UFW. For the 504 though, it sounds like traffic is not getting to NPM. Have you routed ports 80 and 443 to the docker container?
I use headscale on a VPS as an ingress point into my network and I love it. On top of headscale, I use two instances of traefik to make my network. I have one instance of traefik running on the vps which runs a couple of services that I want running 24/7(headscale-ui is nice). It pulls a subdomain certificate for TLS. So any services under say *.vps.example.com get routed to the VPS.
Then I have a wildcard TCP rule pointing the rest of the network traffic to my home server through headscale. My home server is running another instance of traefik where all my services are running. This pulls another wildcard cert for the rest of the *.example.com subdomains.
Cool thing about this setup is I can now have my DNS server rewrite *.example.com to my servers LAN IP. Now when my device is home, it works even when WAN is out. But when I’m out and about, it hits the public DNS and goes through my VPS. With traefik I can write a not !ClientIP rule and essentially block the VPS. Now I can host a service at home but also block it from being accessed from the public. But if I need access to the LAN remotely, I can just use a tailsacale client and get into headscale and see everything.
Its an odd network, but it’s super flexible and works very well for my use case. If you have any questions I’d love to help you set something like this up :D
The over lap of docker containers needs to happen from inside the perspective of the container. If you send Radarr to pull a movie from bittorrent, they both need to “be in the same spot”. If bittorrent thinks it’s saving a movie to /data/torrent then Radarr also needs to see the movie at /data/torrent.
That’s why so many guides use the /data/ label scheme. Its just easy to use and implement. Side note, for hard links to work, all the folders need to be on the same drive. Can’t hard link between different drives.
Ah sorry to hear that. Did you find something better that works for you? I’m open to suggestions :D
I followed along the nixos wiki for kubernetes and creating the “master” kublet is super easy when you set easyCerts = true. Problem is, it spits out files to /var/lib/kubernetes/secrets/ that is owned by root. Specifically, the cluster-admin.pem file. If I want to push commands to the cluster using kubectl I have to elevate to a root shell. I could just chmod or chown the file but that seems like a security risk.
Now I’m not familiar with k8s at all. This is my first go through, so I could be doing something wrong or missing a step. I saw something about the role based security but I haven’t jumped down that rabbit hole yet. Any tips for running kubectl without root?
I’m working on my first kubernetes cluster. I’m trying to set the systems up with NixOS. I can get a kublet and a control plane running. But I’m getting permission errors when trying to use kubectl rootless on the system running the control plane. I think I figured out which file i need to change, now I just want to record that change in my configuration.nix.
Course, feel free to DM if you have questions.
This is a common setup. Have a firewall block all traffic. Use docker to punch a hole through the firewall and expose only 443 to the reverse proxy. Now any container can be routed through the reverse proxy as long as the container is on the same docker network.
If you define no network, the containers are put into a default bridge network, use docker inspect to see the container ips.
Here is an example of how to define a custom docker network called “proxy_net” and statically set each container ip.
networks: proxy_net: driver: bridge ipam: config: - subnet: 172.28.0.0/16 services: app1: image: nginx:latest container_name: app1 networks: proxy_net: ipv4_address: 172.28.0.10 ports: - "8080:80" whoami: image: containous/whoami:latest container_name: whoami networks: proxy_net: ipv4_address: 172.28.0.11Notice how “who am I” is not exposed at all. The nginx container can now serve the whoami container with the proper config, pointing at 172.28.0.11.