Wireguard runs over UDP, the port is undistinguishable from closed ports for most common port scanning bots. Changing the port will obfuscate the traffic a bit. Even if someone manages to guess the port, they'll still need to use the right key, otherwise the response is like from a wrong port - no response. Your ISP can still see that it's Wireguard traffic if they happen to be looking, but can't decipher the contents.
I would drop containers from the equation and just run Wireguard on the host. When issues arise, you'll have a hard time identifying the problem when container networking is in the mix.
Viestit on kyllä Whatsappissa salattuja, totta. Salausavaimet eivät vain ole käyttäjien hallinnassa, vaan Metan palvelimilla, joten halutessaan Meta saa kyllä viestien sisällönkin purettua.
Se, että Meta pääsee viesteihin ei ole tuntunut hetkauttavan ketään.
Niin, tuohan ei ole mikään uusi juttu. Päinvastoin, päästä-päähän-salaus on se uusi juttu...
Mutta tämän asetuksen myötä viranomaiset saisivat suoraan pääsyn kaikkeen viestintään, ja kaikki viestit sitten joku tekoäly kahlaa myös läpi. Lähettää kuvan lapsista uimassa mummolle, niin kohta on virkavalta oven takana.
Ja noin 5 minuuttia käyttöönotosta takaportti on käytössä kaikilla jolla on varaa maksaa lahjuksia.
Vielä suurempi paskamyrsky tulee, kun joku kansanedustaja lähettää meemejä tai jopa jotain salaista Whatsapissa ja ne jotenkin päätyvät julkiseksi Venäjältä käsin.
Tässähän on se, että sitten ollaan ilmeisesti periaatteessa rikollisia kun käytetään takaportitonta viestisovellusta.. Mutta en kyllä usko, että tuota lakia pystyy mitenkään valvomaan. Esim Matrix pyörii kuitenkin HTTPS:n alla, omien kotipalvelimien blokkaaminen olisi melkoinen operaatio.
Kaikista masentavinta koko jutussa on, että suurin osa ihmisistä ei tiedä tästä todella vakavasta yksityisyyden riiston riskistä yhtään mitään.
Mutta samaa mieltä, tämä on kaikin puolin ihan järjetön lakialoite. Jos menee läpi, niin on kyllä usko yhteiskuntaan aika vähissä. Käytännössähän tuo menisi varmaan niin että "rehellisten" ihmisten viestit sitten luetaan ja muiden tavara kulkee edelleen salattuna, kuten tähänkin asti.
Briteissähän meni vastaava laki jo läpi, tosin höllensivät sitä, kun Apple uhkasi blokata iMessagen koko saarivaltiolta.
Saapahan hyvän syyn painostaa perhe ja tutut käyttämään Matrixia, jos Whatsappiin tulee takaportti. Se, että Meta pääsee viesteihin ei ole tuntunut hetkauttavan ketään.
Protonmail, but not really because of encryption. I just liked their Android client and webmail the most. I've had sensitive backups on Proton Drive for a long time, so that also played a role in the choice.
I hosted my own server for quite a few years, but the SMTP clients (Thunderbird, Evolution, K9 mail) all doing things slightly differently made me give up. Biggest push was that K9 mail didn't really move deleted mail to trash. These were probably dovecot configuration issues, but I got tired of searching for solutions. Never had any deliverability issues.
I used to run everything with Pis, but then got a x86 USFF to improve Nextcloud performance.
With the energy price madness last year in Europe, I moved most things to cloud VPSs.
One Pi is still running Home Assistant, hooked to my heating/ventilation unit via RS485/modbus.
I had a ZFS backup server with 2 HDDs hooked up over USB to a Pi 8GB. That is just way too unreliable for anything serious, I think I now have a lot of corrupted files in the backups. Looking into getting some Synology unit for that.
For anything serious that requires file storage, I'd steer clear from USB or SD cards. After getting used to SATA performance, it's hard to go back anyways. I'd really like to use the Pis, but family photo backups turning gray due to bitflips is unacceptable.
They are a great entrypoint to self-hosting and the Linux world though!
Perhaps I misunderstand the words "overlapping" and "hot-swappable" in this case, I'm not a native english speaker. To my knowledge they're not the same thing.
In my opinion wanting to run an extra service as root to be able to e.g. serve a webapp on an unprivileged port is just strange. But I've been using Podman for quite some time. Using Docker after Podman is a real pain, I'll give you that.
on surface they may look like they are overlapping solutions to the untrained eye.
You'll need to elaborate on this, since AFAIK Podman is literally meant as a replacement for Docker. My untrained eye can't see what your trained eye can see under the surface.
In my limited experience, when Podman seems more complicated than Docker, it's because the Docker daemon runs as root and can by default do stuff Podman can't without explicitly giving it permission to do so.
99% of the stuff self-hosters run on regular rootful Docker can run with no issues using rootless Podman.
Rootless Docker is an option, but my understanding is most people don't bother with it. Whereas with Podman it's the default.
Docker is good, Podman is good. It's like comparing distros, different tools for roughly the same job.
The article is old, yes, the first one from a search engine. If you have a source for saying it's not in the works anymore, I'd be glad to see it. Not saying you're wrong.
Just this month there was a statement from FiCom (finnish organization advancing IT businesses' interests) urging our government to not accept the bill, so to me it seems it's just under development.
Even though you said "isn't Nextcloud", I'd still say it's perhaps the simplest solution.
You can disable most the other apps and set calendar as the landing page. If you don't use the other features, the resource usage is very low, just a cron job that does basically nothing. I don't think disabling the default apps has much effect on the footprint, by the way.
Calendar, contacts and notes are why I still self host nextcloud. Just remember to pay/donate to Davx5, they're one of the projects that need to keep running!
Wireguard runs over UDP, the port is undistinguishable from closed ports for most common port scanning bots. Changing the port will obfuscate the traffic a bit. Even if someone manages to guess the port, they'll still need to use the right key, otherwise the response is like from a wrong port - no response. Your ISP can still see that it's Wireguard traffic if they happen to be looking, but can't decipher the contents.
I would drop containers from the equation and just run Wireguard on the host. When issues arise, you'll have a hard time identifying the problem when container networking is in the mix.