Brain damage is progressive. Once it reaches a certain point, it will keep getting worse even with no further trauma.

Well they’ve had a kind, down-to-earth president for a while. Time to bring in an absolute shithead for a change.

So, the article doesn’t say.

What the hell did the dot mean?

No please stay, this joke was the only reason I clicked into the comments

I like the one guy who’s like “Hey, there it is.”

Podman is not yet ready for mainstream, in my experience

My experience varies wildly from yours, so please don’t take this bit as gospel.

Have yet to find a container that doesn’t work perfectly well in podman. The options may not be the same. Most issues I’ve found with running containers boil down to things that would be equally a problem in docker. A sample:

• “rootless” containers are hard to configure. It can almost always be fixed with “–privileged” or some combination of permission flags. This would be equally true for docker; the only meaningful difference is podman tries to push everything into rootless. You don’t have to.
• network filesystems cause headaches, especially smbfs + sqlite app. I’ve had to use NFS or ext4 inside a network-mounted image for some apps. This problem is identical for docker.
• container networking–for specific cases–needs to managed carefully. These cases are identical for docker.

And that’s it. I generally run things once from the podman command line, then use podlet to create a quadlet out of that configuration, something you can’t do with docker. If you are having any trouble with running containers under podman, try the --privileged shortcut, see that it works, and then double back if you think you really need rootless.

I haven’t deployed Cloudflare but I’ve deployed Tailscale, which has many similarities to the CF tunnel.

• Is the tunnel solution appropriate for Jellyfin?

I assume you’re talking about speed/performance here. The overhead added by establishing the connection is mostly just once at the connection phase, and it’s not much. In the case of Tailscale there’s additional wireguard encryption overhead for active connections, but it remains fast enough for high-bandwidth video streams. (I download torrents over wireguard, and they download much faster than realtime.) Cloudflare’s solution is only adding encryption in the form of TLS to their edge. Everything these days uses TLS, you don’t have to sweat that performance-wise.

(You might want to sweat a little over the fact that cloudflare terminates TLS itself, meaning your data is transiting its network without encryption. Depending on your use case that might be okay.)

• I suppose it’s OK for vaultwarden as there isnt much data being transfered?

Performance wise, vaultwarden won’t care at all. But please note the above caveat about cloudflare and be sure you really want your vaultwarden TLS terminated by Cloudflare.

• Would it be better to run nginx proxy manager for everything or can I run both of the solutions?

There’s no conflict between the two technologies. A reverse proxy like nginx or caddy can run quite happily inside your network, fronting all of your homelab applications; this is how I do it, with caddy. Think of a reverse proxy as just a special website that branches out to every other website. With that model in mind, the tunnel is providing access to the reverse proxy, which is providing access to everything else on its own. This is what I’m doing with tailscale and caddy.

• General recs

Consider tailscale? Especially if you’re using vaultwarden from outside your home network. There are ways to set it up like cloudflare, but the usual way is to install tailscale on the devices you are going to use to access your network. Either way it’s fully encrypted in transit through tailscale’s network.

Thanks! I’ll try this and report back. This sounds like a version of (#1) - merge accounts.

Home assistant’s main use case is showing you where your house is on a single map, though. Not sure how immich works, but if it’s one tile per photo with location data, that would be a MUCH bigger ask.

1. Seems like a very reasonable objection to me. I’d guess that most of us Immich users are using it in the first place because it improves the privacy of our photos, and a third party seeing our location data certainly undermines that.
2. I would have complained had I noticed, so you might be the first one to notice. Immich’s userbase isn’t huge right now, it’s definitely possible.
3. Featurewise, I’d like: a) a clearly documented way to disable map data leaving my server; b) a set of well-integrated choices (maybe even just two, as long as one of them is something like openstreetmap); c) the current configurability to be well documented.
4. I’d love it if all such outbound data streams are also documented. Many security and privacy-focused products give you a “quiet” mode of some kind, where you can turn off everything that sends your data somewhere else. It’s a requirement in many enterprise installations.