this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
51 points (94.7% liked)

Selfhosted

46293 readers
625 users here now

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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hi folks. So, I know due to a myriad of reasons I should not allow Jellyfin access to the open internet. However, in trying to switch family over from Plex, I'll need something that "just works".

How are people solving this problem? I've thought about a few solutions, like whitelisting ips (which can change of course), or setting up VPN or tail scale (but then that is more work than they will be willing to do on their side). I can even add some level of auth into my reverse proxy, but that would break Jellyfin clients.

Wondering what others have thought about for this problem

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 1 points 51 minutes ago* (last edited 49 minutes ago)

I have it as an unprivileged container behind a reverse proxy and HTTPS/HSTS. I know it's not perfect but I keep backups of important shit and monitor things regularly.

I agree that Jellyfin needs to improve its API security, though. Their excuse that "it would break clients on old APIs" is moot when C# comes with API versioning features out of the box.

[–] skoell13@feddit.org 3 points 2 hours ago

I use a VPS and a Wiregusrd tunnel together with geoblocking and fail2ban. I've written my setup down, maybe this will help you https://codeberg.org/skjalli/jellyfin-vps-setup

[–] Getting6409@lemm.ee 5 points 4 hours ago

I expose jellyfin to the internet, and some precautions I have taken that I don't see mentioned in these answers are: 1) run jellyfin as a rootless container, and 2) use read-only storage where ever possible. If you have other tools managing things like subtitles and metadata files before jellyfin there's no reason for jellyfin to have read access to the media it hosts. While this doesn't directly address the documented security flaws with jellyfin, you may as well treat it like a diseased plague rat if you're going to expose it. To me, that means worst case scenario is the thing is breached and the only thing for an attacker to do is exfiltrate things limited to jellyfin.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Netbird/Tailscale

You also could use Wireguard as it is a p2p protocol by default.

If you have IPv6 access you could put in on a IPv6 address

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

You can share jellyfin over the net.

The security issues that tend to be quoted are less important than some people claim them to be.

For instance the unauthorized streaming bug, often quoted as one of the worst jellyfin security issues, in order to work the attacker need to know the exact id of the item they want to stream, which is virtually impossible unless they are or have been an authorized client at some point.

Just set it up with the typical bruteforce protections and you'll be fine.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Fine is a relative term

You probably are fine but the company who is getting attacked by your compromised machine isn't

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I don't think jellyfin vulnerabilities could lead to a zombified machine. At least I've not read about something like that happening.

Most Jellyfin issues I known are related to unauthorized API calls of the backend.

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

It's not impossible, Far from it. The ids are not random uuids but hashes derived from the path. Since most people have a similar setup to organize their media, this gets trivial very fast

[–] synestine@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago

If you're worried about it, make sure to not use a default path. Then legit clients are fine but these theoretical attackers get stymied.

[–] BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com 15 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

This. Just setup fail2ban or similar in front of Jellyfin and you'll be fine.

[–] Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu 20 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

You can share jellyfin on the net. I do.

The issues shared wide and large are mostly moot points, where the attacker needs to already have access to the jellyfin itself to have any surface.

Its FUD and I am convinced spread by Plex people in an effort to cover up their fuckup and enshittyfication.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That's a bad idea for so many reasons

The internet is full of bots pounding at your machines to get in. It is only a matter of time until the breach Jellyfin. At the very least you want a reverse proxy with proper security.

I don't see why you would put something like Jellyfin in the internet. Use a VPN solution.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 hour ago

I have had jellyfin exposed to the net for multiple years now.

Countless bots probing everyday, some banned by my security measures some don't. There have never been a breach. Not even close.

To begin with, of you look at what this bots are doing most of them try to target vulnerabilities from older software. I have never even seen a bot targeting jellyfin at all. It's vulnerabilities are not worth attacking, too complex to get it right and very little reward as what can mostly be done is to stream some content or messing around with someo database. No monetary gain. AFAIK there's not a jellyfin vulnerability that would allow running anything on the host. Most vulnerabilities are related to unauthorized actions of the jellyfin API.

Most bots, if not all, target other systems, mostly in search of outdated software with very bad vulnerabilities where they could really get some profit.

I love Jellyfin and use it. I also think the security issues are very serious and it's irresponsible to not fix them. At the very least they can make a new API and give users the option to enable or disable the insecure one until clients get updated. But they don't.

I've decided to remove public access to my Jellyfin server until it's resolved, though it's still accessible behind my VPN.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

I also think Plex probably has open vulns and it's also a more known target. The nail that sticks out furthest gets nailed down.

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 2 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

Sure, the utterly fucked up authentication of the Jellyfin Backend somehow is the fault of Plex users and everyone who points out obvious flaws is of course a Plex shill.

Maybe you should take a look at what you are defending here. The fact that the devs openly refuse to fix this to maintain backwards compatibility, thus endangering their users speaks a lot about the quality of the project

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 13 points 21 hours ago (7 children)

When I did this I set up a VPN on my network and forced anyone that wanted to use it to get on my network.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com 8 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I do. I run it behind a caddy service so it's secured with an SSL. The port is running on a high non standard one. I do keep checking access logs but haven't had a peep apart from the 1 person I shared it with

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That port changing stuff is way outdated and hasn't been effective for a long time.

A quick scan will show it ofcourse. But it stops bots and stuff just hitting "known" ports. I've not had any issues in the months it's been active compared to the previous month's I just used the standard port

[–] ch8zer@lemmy.ca 11 points 21 hours ago (7 children)

AppleTV + Tailscale in and it’s been a flawless experience.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 15 hours ago

I share Jellyfin.

Behind a Reverse Proxy with 2FA that breaks client support.
So only web browser :)

[–] Xanza@lemm.ee 7 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

There are two routes. VPN and VPS.

VPN; setup wireguard and offer services to your wireguard network.

VPS; setup a VPS to act as a reverse proxy for your jellyfin instance.

Each have their own perks. Each have their own caveats.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 hours ago

The VPS would still involve exposing it

load more comments
view more: next ›