view the rest of the comments
Selfhosted
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:
-
Be civil.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
-
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
SSL/TLS error on main link.
Yes, this part is intentional to raise questions and remark :)
The certificate on my website is not valid using the WebPKI standard, but is valid using the DANE standard. It is related to my comment for this project https://sr.ht/~yukikoo/dane_without_root/ .
My issue with the WebPKI model is that any government or big company on the planet could do a MITM on your connection, generate a certificate valid for any website, and get a read/write access to all your webpki TLS communications. The DANE model is an improvement over webpki because instead of the "anyone (every ca / intermediate certificate) can generate a certificate valid for anyone" model, it bring a hierarchical trust structure.
You missed my point
It doesn't work for the user, so it doesn't work.
Its about equivalent to the user as installing your own cert.
DANE provides user friction..but as OP mentioned TLS doesn't work
Which means I don't care because nobody except myself will be able to use it.
I'd care a lot if Firefox and Chrome supported it OOTB
It works fine, just ignore the warning and don't enter any sensitive info
Ah yes, the windows method "just click okay and don't read it or think too hard"
If you're just pushing for WebPKI without "thinking too hard" about perpretrating a security system with a large number of failure points, then you're following that windows method.
SSL/TLS have very specific benefits. None of which matter that much for reading random articles on the web. So I don't see the problem with this website doing their own thing to bring attention to the potential issues of the current system.