sylver_dragon

I’m sure there are several out there. But, when I was starting out, I didn’t see one and just rolled my own. The process was general enough that I’ve been able to mostly just replace the SteamID of the game in the Dockerfile and have it work well for other games. It doesn’t do anything fancy like automatic updating; but, it works and doesn’t need anything special.

I see containers as having a couple of advantages:

1. Separation of dependencies - while not as big of issue as it used to be, just knowing that you won’t end up with the requirements for one application conflicting with another is one less issue to worry about. Additionally, you can do anything you want to one container, without having an effect on another container. You don’t get stuck wanting to reboot or revert the system, but not wanting to break a different running service.
2. Portability - Eventually, you are going to replace the OS of that VM (at least, you should). Moving a container to a new OS is dead simple. Re-installing an application on a new OS, moving data and configs can be anywhere from easy to a pain in the arse, depending on the software.
3. Easier fall back - Have you ever upgraded an application and had everything go to shit? In my years working as a sysadmin, I lost way too many evenings to this sort of bullshit. And while VM snapshots should make reverting easy, sometimes it just didn’t work out that way. Containers force enough separation of applications that you can do just about anything to one container and not effect others.
4. Less dependency on a single install - Have you ever had a system just get FUBAR, and after a few hours of digging the answer seems to be, just format the drive and start over? Maybe you tried some weird application out and the uninstall wasn’t really clean. By having all that crap happen in containers, you can isolate the damage. Nuke the container, nuke the image, and the base OS is still clean.
5. Easier version testing - Want to try out upgrading to version 2 of an application, but worried that it may not be fully baked yet or the new configs may take a while to get right? Do it off in a separate container on a copy of the data. You can do this with VMs and snapshots; but, I find containers to be less overhead.

That all said, if an application does not have an official container image, the added complexity of creating and maintaining your own image can be a significant downside. One of my use cases for containers is running game servers (e.g. Valheim). There isn’t an official image; so, I had to roll my own. The effort to set this up isn’t zero and, when trying to sort out an image for a new game, it does take me a while before I can start playing. And those images need to be updated when a new version of the game releases. Technically, you can update a running container in a lot of cases; but, I usually end up rebuilding it at some point anyway.

I’d also note that, careful use of VMs and snapshots can replicate or mitigate most of the advantages I listed. I’ve done both (decade and a half as a sysadmin). But, part of that “careful use” usually meant spinning up a new VM for each application. Putting multiple applications on the same OS install was usually asking for trouble. Eventually, one of the applications would get borked and having the flexibility to just nuke the whole install saved a lot of time and effort. Going with containers removed the need to nuke the OS along with the application to get a similar effect.

At the end of the day, though. It’s your box, you do what you are most comfortable with and want to support. If that’s a monolithic install, then go for it. While I, or other might find containers a better answer for us, maybe it isn’t for you.

My list of items I look for:

• A docker image is available. Not some sort of make or build script which make gods know what changes to my system, even if the end result is a docker image. Just have a docker image out on Dockerhub or a Dockerfile as part of the project. A docker-compose.yaml file is a nice bonus.
• Two factor auth. I understand this is hard, but if you are actually building something you want people to seriously use, it needs to be seriously secured. Bonus points for working with my YubiKey.
• Good authentication logging. I may be an outlier on this one, but I actually look at the audit logs for my services. Having a log of authentication activity (successes and failures) is important to me. I use both fail2ban to block off IPs which get up to any fuckery and I manually blackhole entire ASNs when it seems they are sourcing a lot of attacks. Give me timestamps (in ISO8601 format, all other formats are wrong), IP address, username, success or failure (as a independent field, not buried in a message or other string) and any client information you can (e.g. User-Agent strings).
• Good error logging. Look, I kinda suck, I’m gonna break stuff. When I do, it’s nice to have solid logging giving me an idea of what I broke and to provide a standardized error code to search on. It also means that, when I give up and post it as an issue to your github page, I can provide you with some useful context.

As for that hackernews response, I’d categorically disagree with most of it.

An app, self-contained, (essentially) a single file with minimal dependencies.

Ya…no. Complex stuff is complex. And a lot of good stuff is complex. My main, self-hosted app is NextCloud. Trying to run that as some monolithic app would be brain-dead stupid. Just for the sake of maintainability, it is going to need to be a fairly sprawling list of files and folders. And it’s going to be dependent on some sort of web server software. And that is a very good place to NOT roll your own. Good web server software is hard, secure web server software is damn near impossible. Let the large projects (Apache/Nginx) handle that bit for you.

Not something so complex that it requires docker.

“Requires docker” may be a bit much. But, there is a reason people like to containerize stuff, it avoids a lot of problems. And supporting whatever random setup people have just sucks. I can understand just putting a project out as a container and telling people to fuck off with their magical snowflake setup. There is a reason flatpak is gaining popularity.
Honestly, I see docker as a way to reduce complexity in my setup. I don’t have to worry about dependencies or having the right version of some library on my OS. I don’t worry about different apps needing different versions of the same library. I don’t need to maintain different virtual python environments for different apps. The containers “just work”. Hell, I regularly dockerize dedicated game servers just for my wife and I to play on.

Not something that requires you to install a separate database.

Oh goodie, let’s all create our own database formats and re-learn the lessons of the '90s about how hard databases actually are! No really, fuck off with that noise. If your app needs a small database backend, maybe try SQLite. But, some things just need a real database. And as with web servers, rolling your own is usually a bad plan.

Not something that depends on redis and other external services.

Again, sometimes you just need to have certain functionality and there is no point re-inventing the wheel every time. Breaking those discrete things out into other microservices can make sense. Sure, this means you are now beholden to everything that other service does; but, your app will never be an island. You are always going to be using libraries that other people wrote. Just try to avoid too much sprawl. Every dependency you spin up means your users are now maintaining an extra application. And you should probably build a bit of checking into your app to ensure that those dependencies are in sync. It really sucks to upgrade a service and have it fail, only to discover that one of it’s dependencies needed to be upgraded manually first, and now the whole thing is corrupt and needs to be restored from backup. Yes, users should read the release notes, they never do.
The corollary here is to be careful about setting your users up for a supply chain attack. Every dependency or external library you add is one more place for your application to be attacked. And just because the actual vulnerability is in SomeCoolLib.js, it’s still your app getting hacked. You chose that library, you’re now beholden to everything it gets wrong.

At the end of it all, I’d say the best app to write is the one you are interested in writing. The internet is littered with lots of good intentions and interesting starts. There is a lot less software which is actually feature complete and useful. If you lose interest, because you are so busy trying to please a whole bunch of idiots on the other side of the internet, you will never actually release anything. You do you, and fuck all the haters. If what you put out is interesting and useful, us users will show up and figure out how to use it. We’ll also bitch and moan, no matter how great your app is. It’s what users do. Do listen, feedback is useful. But, also remember that opinions are like assholes: everyone has one, and most of them stink.

Have you considered just beige boxing a server yourself? My home server is a mini-ITX board from Asus running a Core i5, 32GB of RAM and a stack of SATA HDDs all stuffed in a smaller case. Nothing fancy, just hardware picked to fulfill my needs.

Limiting yourself to bespoke systems means limiting yourself to what someone else wanted to build. The main downside to building it yourself is ensuring hardware comparability with the OS/software you want to run. If you are willing to take that on, you can tailor your server to just what you want.

I do agree with what you are saying, but for a complete beginner, and a very general overview, I didn’t want to complicate things too much. I personally run my own stuff in containers and am behind CG-NAT (it’s why I gave it a mention).

That said, if you really wanted to give the new user that advice, go for it. Rather than just nit pick and do the “but actshuly” bit, start adding that info and point out how the person should do it and what to consider. Build, instead of just tearing down.

No, but you are the target of bots scanning for known exploits. The time between an exploit being announced and threat actors adding it to commodity bot kits is incredibly short these days. I work in Incident Response and seeing wp-content in the URL of an attack is nearly a daily occurrence. Sure, for whatever random software you have running on your normal PC, it’s probably less of an issue. Once you open a system up to the internet and constant scanning and attack by commodity malware, falling out of date quickly opens your system to exploit.

Short answer: yes, you can self-host on any computer connected to your network.

Longer answer:
You can, but this is probably not the best way to go about things. The first thing to consider is what you are actually hosting. If you are talking about a website, this means that you are running some sort of web server software 24x7 on your main PC. This will be eating up resources (CPU cycles, RAM) which you may want to dedicated to other processes (e.g. gaming). Also, anything you do on that PC may have a negative impact on the server software you are hosting. Reboot and your server software is now offline. Install something new and you might have a conflict bringing your server software down. Lastly, if your website ever gets hacked, then your main PC also just got hacked, and your life may really suck. This is why you often see things like Raspberry Pis being used for self-hosting. It moves the server software on to separate hardware which can be updated/maintained outside a PC which is used for other purposes. And it gives any attacker on that box one more step to cross before owning your main PC. Granted, it’s a small step, but the goal there is to slow them down as much as possible.

That said, the process is generally straight forward. Though, there will be some variations depending on what you are hosting (e.g. webserver, nextcloud, plex, etc.) And, your ISP can throw a massive monkey wrench in the whole thing, if they use CG-NAT. I would also warn you that, once you have a presence on the internet, you will need to consider the security implications to whatever it is you are hosting. With the most important security recommendation being “install your updates”. And not just OS updates, but keeping all software up to date. And, if you host WordPress, you need to stay on top of plugin and theme updates as well. In short, if it’s running on your system, it needs to stay up to date.

The process generally looks something like:

• Install your updates.
• Install the server software.
• Apply updates to the software (the installer may be an outdated version).
• Apply security hardening based on guides from the software vendor.
• Configure your firewall to forward the required ports (and only the required ports) from the WAN side to the server.
• Figure out your external IP address.
• Try accessing the service from the outside.

Optionally, you may want to consider using a Dynamic DNS service (DDNS) (e.g. noip.com) to make reaching your server easier. But, this is technically optional, if you’re willing to just use an IP address and manually update things on the fly.

Good luck, and in case I didn’t mention it, install your updates.

Yup, OP doesn’t seem to understand that the Fediverse is still in an “early adopter” stage. For tech stuff, that’s a demographic which is usually dominated by male tech nerds. I suspect the age range is more diverse than the OP claims. Though, I imagine it centers somewhere near the 25-35 range, as those will be the people with the drive and time to engage in online mental masturbation argue with people on the internet.

Also, the math will make the median age skew older. Each older person will have a larger effect on moving the average age up. For example, consider 3 people with ages 45, 20, and 18. they have an average age of of just a bit over 27. There is a lot of room for us old farts to drag the average up while there is only a small range for the kids to drag it down. There might be the rare 9-10 year old who has the wherewithal to make an account and comment. But, I don’t suspect the user base will get all that much younger. Whereas, there’s probably lots of late 30’s and 40 year old users and some even older. Take those same three ages listed above and add in a precocious 10 year old and a 60 year old grey beard. The average is now just over 30. That older person had a larger effect on the average than the kid.

Also, age doesn’t matter all that much. The important thing is that the early adopters are here and making content. Ideally, this will build out the site and others may follow (or not, not every trend works out). But hopefully, this will end up like the Great Digg Migration before it, which fed the Reddit beast. And we’ll have something a new, different and maybe actually better this time.