this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
694 points (99.2% liked)

Selfhosted

58187 readers
348 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.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sefra1@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Good thing my Jellyfin is behind Wireguard.

Consider doing the same if your usecase permits.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

You can always tell who does real IT work in these threads lol

[–] aliser@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

please tell me it doesn't expose itself onto public web by default

[–] clif@lemmy.world 119 points 3 days ago (9 children)

Thank you for posting this. I tend to get a lot of my opensource project info from Lemmy so people who take the time to post it are awesome.

Just updated my home instance. Can confirm that 10.11.7 is available in the Debian repos and the update went perfect. I got a new kernel in the same update : D

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] esc@piefed.social 170 points 3 days ago (47 children)

Don't expose jellyfin to the internet is a golden rule.

[–] Damarus@feddit.org 113 points 3 days ago (23 children)

Kinda defeats the purpose of a media server built to be used by multiple people

[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 58 points 3 days ago (14 children)

Use a VPN, it's not ideal but it's secure.

[–] faercol@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Somehow difficult to install on a TV though.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 71 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (26 children)

That’s never made sense to me; why build an authn frontend instead of just clicking your user if the security is just an illusion anyways. “Use a VPN” is fine for a mainframe, but an active project in 2026 should aspire to be better.

Edit: or make note of that on their several pages with reverse proxy configuration.

Examples dating back over six years https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/5415

[–] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 39 points 3 days ago

I mean I'm sure they'd like to just ship safe code in the first place. But if that's not their expertise and they demonstrate that repeatedly, we gotta take steps ourselves. Secure is obviously best, but I'd rather have insecure Jellyfin behind a VPN than no Jellyfin at all.

[–] IratePirate@feddit.org 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It's not this or that. Security comes in layers. So while I would assume that the Jellyfin developers do their best to secure their application, I acknowledge the fact that bugs do exist and that Jellyfin is developed in and for hobbyist contexts, and thus not scrutinised and pentested for vulnerabilities in the way software meant for professional environments would be. Therefore I'll add an extra layer of security by putting it behind a VPN that only whitelisted clients can access. If a vulnerability is detected, I can be sure it hasn't already been exploited to compromise my server because we're all "among friends" there.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] ligma_centauri@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Just did a cursory read of the commits related to security for this release, and my assumpion based solely on the changes, is that it's not a remote-access vulnerability, but a supply-chain-esque vulnerability where a video you downloaded from a questionable source might trigger code embedded in the metadata to be run by jellyfin.

load more comments (44 replies)
[–] catlover@sh.itjust.works 56 points 3 days ago

I forgot that it's April first, and was wondering what catasthropic event had happend in order that it had to be stated in the title that its not a joke

[–] psoul@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (22 children)

Is it standard practice to release the security updates on GitHub?

I am a very amateur self hoster and wouldn't go on the github of projects on my own unless I wanted to read the "read me" for install instructions. I am realizing that I got aware I needed to update my Jellyfin container ASAP only thanks to this post. I would have never checked the GitHub.

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 days ago

Is it standard practice to release the security updates on GitHub?

Yes.

And then the maintainers of the package on the package repository you use will release the patch there. Completely standard operation.

I recommend younto read up on package repositories on Linux and package maintainers etc.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

The Jellyfin has an official Telegram channel which I use as the newsletter.
Besides that, the selfh.st newsletter usually highlights the more popular projects if such an issue arises.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›