Ikea and Lidl zigbee work well for me and are reasonably cheap. Ikea’s look a little better, but I have only one because it is a pretty recent product.
- 0 Posts
- 73 Comments
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•How do you secure your home lab? Like, physically? From thieves?English
2·1 month agoI have automated it with a small initramfs script which has half password and download the other half from internet. My threat model is to protect from a random thief. So they should connect it to a network similar to mine (same netmask and gateway) and boot it before I can remove the half key from internet.
some security which is on my TODO list is: allow fetching the half key only from my home IP and add some sort of alert for when it is fetched.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•How do you secure your home lab? Like, physically? From thieves?English
2·1 month agoThe really important things (essentially only photos) are backed up on a different USB drive and remotely on backblaze. Around one terabyte cost 2-3$ per month (you pay by operation, so it depends also by how frequently you trigger the backup). You want to search for “cold storage” which is the name for cloud storage unfrequently accessed (in other words, more storage than bandwidth). As a bonus, if you use rclone you can encrypt your data before sending it to the cloud.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•How do you secure your home lab? Like, physically? From thieves?English
35·1 month agoBackup and encryption. encryption prevents the thief to see my data, backup allows me to make a new server. Furthermore, as other pointed out, I don’t expect that a common thief will see a lot of value in a small black box on top of a shelf
I remember reading a post on mastodon where it was explained that no mother board validates the secure boot keys expiration dates otherwise it wouldn’t boot the first time the BIOS battery gets empty and the internal clock gets reset. The post was written well and was citing some sources. But I didn’t try to verify these assertions.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Is it possible to make WoL unicast work indefinitely?English
2·2 months agoI’m not familiar with this setup. But do you want for the server to boot as soon as it receive any packet addressed to its IP?
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Is it possible to make WoL unicast work indefinitely?English
6·2 months agoYou need to send the WOL packet to the broadcast address of your network, not to the machine IP address. It this way all the machines on the network will receive it, including the ones that have been powered off for a while
lorentzto
homeassistant@lemmy.world•Automation being broken by a disconnected light timing out??English
31·2 months agoI remember searching for a similar workaround in the past. I’m not sure parallel will work because the whole automation is blocked on error if I recall correctly. A workaround I found suggested on the ha website (but never tried) was to put the command that may error in a script and run the script as “fire and forget” from the automation. If the automation doesn’t wait for the script to finish it won’t detect the error either. But, as other pointed out, try to make the zigbee network more stable first.
lorentzto
homeassistant@lemmy.world•Automation being broken by a disconnected light timing out??English
4·2 months agoAlso, since zigbee is a mesh network, the fix could be as easy as adding a smart plug halfway between the controller and the light. Every zigbee device not running on battery works as a repeater too
Just use the directory listing of your favourite web server. You have a HTTP read only view of a directory and all of its content. If you self host likely you have already a reverse proxy, so it is just matter of updating its configuration. I’m sure it is supported by Apache, Nginx, LightHttpd, and Caddy. But I would expect every webserver supports it. Caddy is the easiest to use if you need to start from scratch.
I use filestash. I like it because it can connect with so many backends. In my setup it uses samba behind the scenes all the shares permissions are in a single configuration and I don’t have to worry about a different set of user credentials.
I’d say that the most important takeover of this approach is to stop all the containers before the backup. Some applications (like databases) are extremely sensitive to data corruption. If you simply ´cp´ while they are running you may copy files of the same program at different point in time and get a corrupted backup. It is also important mentioning that a backup is good only if you verify that you can restore it. There are so many issues you can discover the first time you recover a backup, you want to be sure you discover them when you still have the original data.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Encrypting without full disk encryption questionEnglish
1·5 months agoGood point, I’ll add it on my TODO list
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Encrypting without full disk encryption questionEnglish
2·5 months agoThe decryption key is more than 20 random character, so if you get only half of it is not a biggie and it doesn’t look like anything interesting.
It is on the internet mostly because I don’t have anything else to host it locally. But I see some benefit: I wanted for the server to be available immediately after a power failure. If it fetches the key from internet I just need for the router to be online, if it fetches it from the local network I need another server running unencrypted disk.
Linux from chromebook is just a configuration you enable from the settings menu. If offers you a shell which is similar to a Ubuntu and you can install standard Linux software using the “apt install” command. Said so, if they cannot even install chrome extensions this is likely disabled too.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Encrypting without full disk encryption questionEnglish
5·5 months agoSecond reason. It may run your vpn, with the server down you cannot connect to it and provide the decryption key unless you are connected to the same network.
There are some good answer around where the server can easily decrypt automatically as long as it is connected in your home but will likely fail at a thief’s home. These are a much safer setup than keeping data unencrypted even if they are not bullet proof.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Encrypting without full disk encryption questionEnglish
21·5 months agoThe issue I see with TPM is that it will always unlock the drive as long as it is connected to the same motherboard. It means you have to trust all the services you run to be correctly secured. Like there is little reason to encrypt your hard drive in this way if later you have a samba share open without any password.
lorentzto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Encrypting without full disk encryption questionEnglish
4·5 months agoI’ve configured something similar. The /boot partition is the only unencrypted. In the initramfs there is a script that downloads half of the decryption key from http, while the other half is stored in the script itself. The script implements automated retry until it can fetch the key and decrypt the root partition.
My attack model here is that, as soon as I realize someone stole my NAS I can shutdown the server hosting half of the decryption key making my data safe. There is a window where the attacker could connect it to a network and decrypt the data, but it is made more difficult by the static network configuration: they should have a default gateway with the same IP address of mine.
On my TODO list I also have to implement some sort of notification to get an alert when the decryption key is fetched from internet.
They also says that installing a different os will invalidate the warranty. But their x86 models (I wasn’t aware of the arm) literally ship with a USB drive connected to an internal USB port which starts the setup of their custom Linux if it detects no OS on the internal drives. You just swap that pendrive and you install whatever you want. I cannot say it works for all the models, but I did a little research before buying mine and I can say it run debian for more that one year without any compatibility issue.

It is not just a matter of how many ports are open. It is about the attack surface. You can have a single 443 open with the best reverse proxy, but if you have a crappy app behind which allows remote code execution you are fucked no matter what.
Each port open exposes one or more services on internet. You have to decide how much you trust each of these services to be secure and how much you trust your password.
While we can agree that SSH is a very safe service, if you allow password login for root and the password is “root” the first scanner that passes will get control of your server.
As other mentioned, having everything behind a vpn is the best way to reduce the attack surface: vpn software is usually written with safety in mind so you reduce the risk of zero days attacks. Also many vpn use certificates to authenticate the user, making guessing access virtually impossible.