Comment by yunaflox
11 hours ago
Does this introduce basic UX changes, like saying that a media will be permanently lost instead of "will be removed from Jellyfin" which is inaccurate?
Edit: And making it more secure? Just because it is commonly for LAN doesn't mean it can be insecure
> like saying that a media will be permanently lost instead of "will be removed from Jellyfin" which is inaccurate?
I don't know if that changed, but I gave jellyfin only read only access to my movies.
i believe the maintainers stance is that jellyfin should not be exposed and it should always be behind a vpn
Reverse proxy works fine. There’s even a setting in Jellyfin to provide the proxy IP.
I doubt that, how would that work? You would need to give all your friends a VPN login into your local network for all of their devices, including TVs.
or your friend can setup VPN on his Router box.
5 replies →
not necessarily always a VPN, but you can also use a reverse proxy like caddy or nginx where encryption and security are primary concerns instead of something non-essential like in jellyfin.
Their stance is actually that exposing it is fine
Frankly at this point, everything that is not explicitly fully public should be...
Unfortunately, yeah.
Including, but not limited to, sending passwords in cleartext on login.
As opposed to what? The password needs to reach the server. Encryption is the job of HTTPS.
... as opposed to using salted hashing like in every tutorial since 1990s.
2 replies →