2.5 years ago, I migrated all my services hosted on a cloud provider to a homeserver.

This homeserver is also my workstation/gaming/dev/everything. I use QubesOS (an operating system based on the Xen hypervisor), and wrote some document about it: https://neowutran.ovh/qubes/articles/homeserver.pdf

Basically, I am hosting:

  • DNS
  • Matrix
  • Email
  • Jitsi
  • Mumble
  • Peertube
  • Screego
  • Nextcloud
  • Searxng
  • Tor
  • Wireguard VPN
  • Copy of wikipedia
  • Personal website And others.

And for TLS, to have better security, and to avoid relying on third party company/providers, I am using DANE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS-based_Authentication_of_Named_Entities

https://sr.ht/~yukikoo/dane_without_root/

https://github.com/buffrr/letsdane

The “dane_without_root” is one of my projects and I am welcoming review / feedback on it

( I also posted about it on the QubesOS forum: https://forum.qubes-os.org/t/highlighting-neowutrans-technical-doc-about-qubes )

    • greyscale@lemmy.grey.oooEnglish
      11·
      4 days ago

      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

          • hirihit640@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            2·
            4 days ago

            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.

            • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              1·
              1 day ago

              SSL/TLS have very specific benefits. None of which matter that much for reading random articles on the web.

              it is a huge benefit if a man in the middle cannot run scripts on your computer.

              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.

              there is no problem with that. this could work, with the required patch to firefox, also in the repo.

              • hirihit640@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                1·
                1 day ago

                IMO when reading random articles on the internet you already have to worry about untrusted scripts. I just use NoScript, and if the website requires Javascript I move on

                • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  1·
                  23 hours ago

                  I don’t agree, I think there is a difference in likely outcomes. but even without scripts, you don’t want you article’s content (text, images, statements or names) be falsified by an attacker. Unless you are just reading the article to waste time, and magically what you read will not influence your views.

                  • hirihit640@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                    1·
                    16 hours ago

                    I already considered that, and for an untrusted website I already don’t trust the content or the scripts. So it doesn’t matter if it was modified or not, it’s still untrusted.

                    Facts can be verified with sources you do trust (which should be using HTTPS). Logic can be used to verify others.