How would a thinking emoji make it clear your question isn’t serious? Also, things have been available for a limited time long before phishing attempts were a thing, and will continue to exist for legitimate purposes long after. You can’t expect the entire rest of the world to stop doing something innocuous just because it’s also used as a tactic to fool a small subset of inattentive people.
lol I would open every port on my router and route them all to wireguard before I would ever consider doing this
I’d just install UFW and either set the default for incoming and outgoing to deny and unblock the game ports manually, or just set incoming to deny and outgoing to allow.
You could pair that with OpenSnitch to see all attempted incoming and outgoing connections and block them by default, and then just allow the ones you want as they happen.
I use notifications in Thunder and I’ve had no issues. I haven’t compared the difference or anything, but when I’ve happened to check battery usage it’s always been a reasonable amount for how much I’ve used it that day. It does generate a decent amount of network traffic since it’s regularly checking with you instance for it, and that traffic is generated for each account you have reaching out to each instance. That should be how any FOSS app works though, the alternative would be something like Sync where you pay to have actual pushes sent from their server.
My theory is that the RTSP port (554) is for streaming and that when I go to the local address (that is on 80), the site ITSELF initiates a connection to port 554 in the background. However, this apparently does not happen when I connect remotely.
I think you’re on the right track here. The DVR is probably telling your browser to connect to http://192.168.1.222:554 for the stream, which on LAN is fine because you have a route to 192.168.1.222, but when connecting externally you won’t be able to get to 192.168.1.222.
You can probably check the network connections in dev tools in the browser to confirm that.
Edit: Editing this to also stress the importance of the advice given by @SteveTech@programming.dev. My home cameras are also only accessible from outside my network via wireguard.
I use Nextcloud with Nginx Proxy Manager and just use NPM to handle the reverse proxy, nothing in Nextcloud other than adding the domain to the config so it’s trusted.
I use Plex instead of Jellyfin, but I stream it through NPM with no issues. I can’t speak to the tunnel though, I prefer a simple wireguard tunnel for anything external so I’ve never tried it.
Edit: unless that’s what you mean by tunnel, I was assuming you meant traefik or tailscale or one of the other solutions I see posted more often, but I think one or both of those use wireguard under the hood.
The issue is that the docker container will still be running as the LXC’s root user even if you specify another user to run as in the docker compose file or run command, and if root doesn’t have access to the dir the container will always fail.
The solution to this is to remap the unprivileged LXC’s root user to a user on the Proxmox host that has access to the dir using the LXC’s config file, mount the container’s filesystem using pct mount, and then chown everything in the container owned by the default root mapped user (100000).
These are the commands I use for this:
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type f -exec chown username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type d -exec chown username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type l -exec chown -h username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type f -exec chown :username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type d -exec chown :username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type l -exec chown -h :username {} +
(Replace xxx with the LXC number and username with the host user/UID)
If group permissions are involved you’ll also have to map those groups in the LXC config, create them in the LXC with the corresponding GIDs, add them as supplementary groups to the root user in the LXC, and then add them to the docker compose yaml using group_add.
It’s super confusing and annoying but this is the workflow I’m using now to avoid having to have any resources tied up in VMs unnecessarily.
I’ve been doing this for at least a decade now and the drives are just as reliable as if you bought them normally. The only downside is having to block one of the pins on the SATA connector with kapton tape for it to work.
Damn I forgot no content existed online and could be profitable before YouTube came along and saved us all from the dark ages.
Exactly, then it could have just been a text list on a webpage and we’d all be better off.
Someone made something up about you once, so now your plan is to never be introspective again for the rest of your life?
Good luck with that. I’m sure the issue in that situation was definitely how self-aware you were at the time.
I like the workflow of having a DNS record on my network for *.mydomain.com pointing to Nginx Proxy Manager, and just needing to plug in a subdomain, IP, and port whenever I spin up something new for super easy SSL. All you need is one let’s encrypt wildcard cert for your domain and you’re all set.
IIRC from running into this same issue, this won’t work the way you have the volume bind mounts set up because it will treat the movies and downloads directories as two separate file systems, which hardlinks don’t work across.
If you bind mounted /media/HDD1:/media/HDD1 it should work, but then the container will have access to the entire drive. You might be able to get around that by running the container as a different user and only giving that user access to those two directories, but docker is also really inconsistent about that in my experience.
If you want Proxmox to dynamically allocate resources you’ll need to use LXCs, not VMs. I don’t use VMs at all anymore for this exact reason.
I had done a few easier Linux installs on Raspberry Pis and VMs in the past, but when I decided I wanted to try using Linux as my daily driver on my desktop (dual-booted with Windows at the time) I decided to go with a manual Arch install using a guide and I would 100% recommend it if you’re trying to pick up Linux knowledge. It’s really not a difficult process to just follow step-by-step, but I looked up each command as they came up in the guide so I could try to understand what I was doing and why.
I don’t know what packages archinstall includes because I’ve never used it, but really the biggest thing for me learning was booting into a barebones Arch install. Looking into the different options for components and getting everything I needed setup and configured how I wanted was invaluable.
That being said, now that I know how, is that how I would choose to install it? Nah, I use the CachyOS installer now, but if I wanted stock Arch I’d probably use archinstall.
I think Wayland is at point now where I’d be comfortable recommending it to beginners. I’m on nvidia and just switched myself in the past month because I felt like it was finally ready.
To me this is actually a good move for Ubuntu’s reputation.
Losing good reputation or losing bad reputation?
Pretty sure they’re talking about generative AI created deepfakes being easier than manually cutting out someone’s face and pasting it on a photo of a naked person, not comparing Adobe’s AI to a different model.
The only one I can think of is that Source might still have some id code in it from the goldsrc days, but that was before it was open sourced.
What is sketchy about downloading a torrent that it could save you from? Wouldn’t it be executing whatever you downloaded on another machine that would be the risky part?