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

  • non_burglar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Oof, a lot of vitriol in this thread.

    In the end, security is less about tooling and config, and more about understanding the risks and acting accordingly.

    I expose jellyfin to the internet, but only to a specific public IP. That reduced my risk considerably.

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours 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.

  • Getting6409@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    7 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 write 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.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    18 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
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    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.

    • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 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.

        • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          What? Why would I have to make my library harder to manage just because Jellyfin devs can’t get their act together? They should just start a api/v2 and secure it properly while allowing to disable the old one

          • blitzen@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I’m with you that you shouldn’t have to, but putting your media directory one level up in a randomly generated directory name isn’t too bad. ~/[random uuid]/media/… may not be a terrible idea in any case.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours 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 know are related to unauthorized API calls of the backend.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          I think it is a matter of time honestly.

          Jellyfin has grown enough in popularity that it is likely a target for a state actor looking to create some minions. Just because there isn’t any known remote code execution vulnerabilities doesn’t mean there couldn’t be one in the future.

          Maybe I’m being paranoid but it seems way safer to just not expose Jellyfin.

  • Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      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.

      • dogs0n@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        The internet is full of bots pounding at your machines to get in. It is only a matter of time until the breach Jellyfin.

        If you are talking about brute force attacks for your password, then use a good password… and something like fail2ban to block ips that are spamming you.

        This point doesn’t exactly match, but: public services like google auth don’t require users use vpns. They have a lot more money to keep stuff secure, but you may see my point… auth isn’t too trivial of a feature to keep secure nowadays. They implement similar protections, something to block spammers and make users have good passwords (if you dont use a good password, you are still vulnerable on any service).

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The password is totally irrelevant for the most part. The worst case is that they get access to the dashboard

          The problem is when major security vulnerabilities are found like remote code execution

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours 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.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Your IP address is what they are after

          They quietly compromise your system and then your IP gets used as a proxy for attacks against larger targets like government institutions.

          How would you know that you were compromised?

          I know this sounds far fetched but if you remember there was a Lastpass breach due to Plex. You need to very careful with the public internet.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      19 hours ago

      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.

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      23 hours ago

      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

  • Chris@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

      • Chris@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        Probably doesn’t. Might need to use the router to get the whole network on th vpn

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        I have my smart TV access it over my local network. If you’re using a friend’s instance, you could set up a WiFi SSID that tunnels everything over your VPN.

        If that’s onerous, you can make it publicly accessible, but only for whitelisted client IPs.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Yeah I want to completely switch off of Plex but neither is a good solution for my non tech family members. Mother in law is in a retirement center where they use wifi provided for the condos so I can’t access her router. And I would expect her ip to occasionally change on reboots etc. I might try IP ranges or narrow geo blocking.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Yeah, an IP range totally works. Figure out the subnet info and add that to a whitelist. It’s a pain, but it should keep the script kiddies at bay.

  • majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    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

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

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

      • majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        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

  • Xanza@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

      • Xanza@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        You’re exposing your jellyfin instance to a single IP, your VPS. That’s what a reverse proxy is.

        You block all communication from any IP but local, and your VPS IP from jellyfin, and forward web traffic from your VPS to your jellyfin instance. It’s not the same as exposing your jellyfin instance directly. Not sure why I have to explain that…but here we are, I guess.

  • ch8zer@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

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

  • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I share Jellyfin.

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

  • fishynoob@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t do this, but I would set up oAuth like Authelia or something behind a reverse-proxy and authenticate Jellyfin clients through that.

  • RonnyZittledong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    You could probably set up a cloudflare tunnel. I forget what they call it. I think technically sending video through it is against their TOS but if just a few friends and family are using it I doubt you will hit their naughty list.

    • Censed@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve heard mixed responses about how sensitive they are about routing video through their service. I’ve heard some people are just fine running jellyfin/Plex while others get shut down from routing a security system through it.

      • Clusterfck@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’ve used it about 2 years now. I have both Jellyfin and even had Invidious for a while. I don’t even know it was against any terms until right now.

  • TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve been making people use VPN, but that’s been a huge barrier to entry. I’m in the process of switching to IP allow list in traefik.