15 ms·

Why Self-Host?

• felishiagreen12 11mo ago
  [dead]
• neko_lover 11mo ago
  interesting to find out there are self-hostable location tracking solutions as replacement for google location services and the like!
• simonw 11mo ago
  The existence of Tailscale has made me a lot less scared of self-hosing than I used to be, since it provides a method of securing access that's both robust and easy to setup. ... but I still worry about backups. Having encrypted off-site backups is essential for this to work, and they need to be frequently tested as well. There are good tools for that too (I've had good experiences with restic to Cloudflare B2) but assembling them is still a fair amount of overhead, and making sure they keep working needs discipline that I may want to reserve for other problems!
  • cls59 11mo ago
    The control plane of Tailscale can even be self-hosted via the Headscale project: https://github.com/juanfont/headscale https://github.com/juanfont/headscale As for backups, I like both https://github.com/restic/restic https://github.com/restic/restic and https://github.com/kopia/kopia/ https://github.com/kopia/kopia/. Encryption is done client-side, so the only thing the offsite host receives is encrypted blobs.
    • fundatus 11mo ago
      For anyone looking for a convenient way to set restic up: Backrest[1] provides a docker container and a web interface to configure, monitor and restore your restic backups. [1] https://github.com/garethgeorge/backrest https://github.com/garethgeorge/backrest
  • romanzipp 11mo ago
    That's right. I also haven't solved the backup problem perfectly but I'd love to dive in deeper in the future. Well-tested is probably the important aspect in this
  • Sanzig 11mo ago
    I'm currently using Restic + Backblaze, but I'm building a new NAS with OpenZFS. My plan for it is to use ZFS send to backup whole datasets automatically. I was thinking of giving zfsbackup-go [1] a try, since it allows using ZFS send with any S3 object storage provider. No idea how well it'll work, but I'll give it a shot. [1] https://github.com/someone1/zfsbackup-go https://github.com/someone1/zfsbackup-go
  • smiley1437 11mo ago
    I value my time as well that's why I have 2 Synology devices, one at my home, one at my sibling's home. Both on Tailscale and we use Hyperbackup between them. It was very easy to set up and provides offsite backups for both of us. Synology very recently (a day ago) decided to allow 3rd party drives again with DSM 7.3.
  • move-on-by 11mo ago
    I do as much self hosting as I can, but at the end of the day it requires buy-in by all users to be effective. It can create a lot of friction otherwise. I’ve accepted it’s just not going to happen. The absolutely most important item (IMO) is photos- which I frankly do not trust Apple’s syncing logic to not screw up at some point. I’ve taken the approach that my self-hosting _is_ the backup. They lock me out or just wipe everything, no problem I have it all backed up. If the house burns down- everything is still operational.
  • jasode 11mo ago
    >... but I still worry about backups. For me, it's not just off-site backups, it's also the operational risks if I'm not around which I wrote about previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39526863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39526863 In addition to changing my mind about self-hosting email, my most recent adventure was self-hosting Bitwarden/Vaultwarden for passwords management. I got everything to work (SSL certificates, re-startable container scripts to survive server reboots, etc) ... but I didn't like the resultant complexity. There was also the random unreliability because a new iOS client would break Vaultwarden and you'd have to go to github and download the latest bugfix. There's no way for my friend to manage that setup. She didn't want to pay for a 1Passord subscription so we switched to KeePass. I'm still personally ok with self-hosting some low-stakes software like a media server where outages don't really matter. But I'm now more risk-averse with self-hosting critical email and passwords. EDIT to reply: >Bitwarden client works fine if server goes down, you just can't edit data I wasn't talking about the scenario of a self-hosted Vaultwarden being temporarily down. (Although I also didn't like that the smartphone clients will only work for 30-days offline[1] which was another decision factor to not stay on it.) Instead, the issue is Bitwarden will make some changes to both their iOS client and their own "official" Bitwarden servers which is incompatible with Vaultwarden. This happens because they have no reason to test it on an "unofficial" implementation such as Vaultwarden. That's when you go to the Vaultwarden Github "Issues" tab and look for a new git commit with whatever new Rust code makes it work with the latest iOS client again. It doesn't happen very frequently, but it happened often enough that it makes it only usable for a techie (like me) to babysit. I can't inflict that type of random broken setup on the rest of my family. Vaultwarden is not set-and-forget. (I'm also not complaining about Bitwarden or Vaultwarden and those projects are fine. I'm just being realistic about how the self-hosted setup can't work without my IT support.) [1] Offline access in Bitwarden client only works for 30 days. : https://bitwarden.com/blog/configuring-bitwarden-clients-for-offline-access/#:~:text=Offline%20Vault%20sessions%20will%20expire%20after%2030%20days. https://bitwarden.com/blog/configuring-bitwarden-clients-for...
    • npodbielski 11mo ago
      Bitwarden client works fine if server goes down, you just can't edit data. I am self hosting bitwarden for several years and I do not complain.
  • npodbielski 11mo ago
    You can look at https://kopia.io/ https://kopia.io/ Looks quite OK. With one downside that it manages only one backup target so you can't I.e. backup to local HDD and to cloud. You need two instances.
  • throwzasdf 11mo ago
    [dead]
• throw-10-8 11mo ago
  He mentions nextcloud, has anyone been self-hosting this for a small org with 100-200 users?
  • pauleee 11mo ago
    Kinda. I use managed Nextcloud by Hetzner (StorageShare) for ~20 people with their smallest instance (1TB, 4.50 EUR/month) and connected it with a Collabora hosted on the smallest Hetzner VPS (this could use more cores). If you wanna self-host completly look at https://github.com/nextcloud/all-in-one https://github.com/nextcloud/all-in-one . I have this running on my NAS for other stuff, but it just works out of the box. Edit: and it scales. Orgs with a lot more people use it for 10k users or more. And it doesn't need a 100 EUR/month setup, from what I experienced.
    • throw-10-8 11mo ago
      Yeah I tested it out with the hetzner app on their smallest dedicated server and it ran fine. Is storage share the managed service?
  • dizhn 11mo ago
    Yes it's fine. Do you have any particular questions?
    • throw-10-8 11mo ago
      What does your usage look like? My use would be about 30 heavy daily users, another hundred sporadic. Mostly doc editing and video calls. What kind of hosting infra are you using? Hetzner seems popular. Any major recent security concerns, it seems to have a large attack surface.
      • dizhn 11mo ago
        We use it as primarily a file sharing thing. We do not use it for video calls (and I woulnd't recomment it for that purpose).Last time I tried integrating with an office suite server was also a pain in the ass. I do use its calendar and dav addressbook because it works fairly well. The only security thing we've done is disable a few paths in the web configuration and only allow SSO logins. (Authentik). You can also put it behind Authentik's embedded proxy for more security. I didn't do it because of the use case with generic calendar/addresbook software. Hetzner is good. Great even, in terms of what you get for the money. They do provide mostly professional service. You will not get one iota of extra service other than what they promise. VERY German in that regard and very unapologetic about it. And don't talk about them in public with your real identity attached. They ban people for arbitrary reasons and have their uber fans (children with a 4 dollar vps) convince other fellow users that if you got banned you must have been a Russian hacker trying to infiltrate the Hague.
• xnx 11mo ago
  Defining "self-host" so narrowly as meaning that the software has to run on a server in your home closet ensures that it will always remain niche and insignificant. We should encourage anything that's not SaaS: open source non-subscription phone apps, plain old installable software that runs on Windows, cloud apps that can easily be run (and moved) between different hosts, etc. Anything that prevents lock-in and gives control to the user is what we want.
  • srcreigh 11mo ago
    It does include windows installable software. People often start out by running stuff that way (maybe in Docker).
  • al_borland 11mo ago
    We can’t have the word lose all meaning either. A cloud app that uses standard protocols and can be moved is still being run on a server you don’t own or control, by someone who could decide to change polices about data collection and privacy at any time. You can leave, but will you be able to migrate before the data is harvested? How would you ever know for sure?
    • FinnKuhn 11mo ago
      The general definition (although it can be pretty loose) is that you need to control the computer/server your software is running on. If that is a VPS or a server in your basement really doesn't matter all that much in the end when talking about if something is self-hosted or not.
      • ziml77 11mo ago
        Why doesn't it matter? A VPS is still someone else's computer. They could be monitoring what you're doing on there because they run the hypervisor and they have physical access.
        • FinnKuhn 11mo ago
• shadowgovt 11mo ago
  This era has been a long time coming. We've known for decades now that the philosophy underpinning Free Software ("it's my computer and I should be able to use it as I wish") breaks down when it's no longer my computer. Attempts were made to come up with a similar philosophy for Cloud infrastructure, but those attempts are largely struggling; they run into logical contradictions or deep complexity that the Four Essential Freedoms don't have. Issues like 1. Since we don't own the machines, we don't actually know what is needed to maintain system health. We are just guessing. Every new collected piece of information on our information is an opportunity for an argument. 2. Even if we can make arguments about owning our data, the arguments about owning metadata on that data, or data on the machines processing our data, are much murkier... Yet that data can often be reversed back to make guesses about our data because manipulation of our data creates that metadata. 3. With no physical control of the machines processing the data, we are de-facto in a trust relationship with (usually) strangers, a trust relationship that is generally not the case when we own the hardware; who cares what the contract says when every engineer at the hosting company has either physical access to the machine or a social relationship with someone who does, a relationship we lack? When your entire email account is out in the open or your PII has been compromised because of either bad security practices or an employee deciding to do whatever they want on their last day, are you really confident that contract will make you whole? If there can be, practically, no similar philosophical grounding to the Four Freedoms, the conclusion is that cloud hosting is incompatible with those goals and we have to re-own the hardware to maintain the freedoms, if the freedoms matter.
• sksksk 11mo ago
  With self hosting email, if the digital sovreignty aspect is more important to you than the privacy aspect... What I do is use gmail with a custom domain, self host an email server, and use mbysnc[1] to always be downloading my emails from gmail. Then I connect to that email server for reading my emails, but still use gmail for sending. It also means that google can't lock me out of my emails, I still retain all my emails, and if I want move providers, I simply change the DNS records of my domain. But I don't have any issues around mail delivery.
  • jraph 11mo ago
    Why not also do the sending? Deliverability concerns?
    • sksksk 11mo ago
      Yep exactly, it removes a whole class of potentially problems. Doing the sending myself wouldn't improve my digital sovreignty, which is my primary motivation.
    • singron 11mo ago
      Not OP, but yes. For personal use, you don't have enough traffic to establish reputation, so you get constantly blocked regardless of DKIM/DMARC/SPF/rDNS. Receiving mail is reliable though, so you can do that yourself and outsource just sending to things like Amazon SES or SMTP relays.
      • tracker1 11mo ago
        Depending on your mail flow, there's SendGrid and other options at a pretty reasonable cost to handle delivery concerns. I have one server set for sendgrid and another I've got setup for direct delivery... the only issue I've had sending from my own is to Outlook.com servers (not o365 or hotmail though). With DMARC/SPF, etc, gmail has been okay as well.
      • throwzasdf 11mo ago
        > For personal use, you don't have enough traffic to establish reputation, so you get constantly blocked regardless of DKIM/DMARC/SPF/rDNS. Been selfhosting personal low traffic email since the 1990's, I don't have that problem.
• Havoc 11mo ago
  Also just life stability. If i figure out a foss thing once i can functionally use that for life as personal infra A SaaS - they could change price tomorrow or change terms or do any number of things that could be an issue. It’s a severely asymmetrical dynamic Don’t think I’ll ever do email though
• xoa 11mo ago
  This list of "why self host" focuses almost entirely on privacy/sovereignty which, as the author admits, has come to be a pretty standard reason given. But I think there are plenty of purely practical ones as well, depending on your specific situation. There's a spectrum here from self-hosting to leaving it all to 3rd parties, and you can mix and match to get the most value out of it. But I'd add: - Use case/cloud business model mismatch: ultimately much of the value of cloud services comes from flexibility and amortization across massive audiences. Sometimes that's exactly what one might be after. But sometimes that can leave a big enough mismatch between how it gets charged for vs what you want to do that you will flat out save money, a lot of money, very fast with your own metal you can adjust to yourself. - Speed: Somewhat related to above but on the performance side instead of cost. 10G at this point is nothing on a LAN and it's been regularly easy to pick up used 100G Chelsio NICs for <$200, I've got a bunch of them. Switches have been slowly coming down in price as well, Mikrotik's basic 4 port 100G switch is $200/port brand new. If you're ok with 25 or 40 can do even less. Any of those is much, much faster (and of course lower latency) then the WAN links a lot of us have access to, even at a lot of common data centers that'd be quite the cost add. And NVMe arrays have made it trivial to saturate that, even before getting into the computing side. Certainly not everyone has that kind of data and wants/needs to be able to access it fast offline, but it's not useless. - Customization: catch all for beyond all-of-the-above, but just you really can tune directly to what you're interested in terms of cpu/memory/gpu/storage/whatever mix. You can find all sorts of interesting used stuff for cheap and toss it in if you want to play with it. Make it all fit you. - Professional development: also not common, but on HN in particular probably a number of folks would derive some real benefit from kicking the tires on the various lower level moving parts that go into the infrastructure they work with at a higher level normally. Once in awhile you might even find it leads to entire new career paths, but I think even if one typically works with abstractions having a much better sense of what's behind them is occasionally quite valuable. Not to diminish the value of privacy/sovereignty either, but there are had dollar/euro/yen considerations as well. I also think self hosting tends to build on itself, in that there can be a higher initial investment in infrastructure but then previously hard/expensive adaptions get easier and easier. Spinning up a whole isolated vm/jail/vlan/dynamic allocation becomes trivial. Of course, it is upfront investment, you are making some bets on tech, and it's also just plain more physical stuff, which takes up physical space of yours. I think a fair number of people might get value out of the super shallow end of the pool (starting with having your own domain) but there's nothing wrong with deliberately leaning on remote infra in general for most. But worth reevaluating from time to time, because the amount of high value and/or open source stuff available now is just wonderful. And if we have a big crash might be a lot of great deals to pick up!
• podgietaru 11mo ago
  I worked on getting [Omnivore](https://github.com/omnivore-app/omnivore https://github.com/omnivore-app/omnivore) from cloud to self hosting. I never appreciated the value of Self-hosting until then. I was so sick of finding new services to do essentially the same thing. I just wanted some stability. Now I can continue using the thing I was already using, and have developed my own custom RSS Reader ontop of Omnivore. I don't need to care about things breaking my flow. I can update the parsing logic if websites break, or I want to bypass some paywalls. It really changed my view on Self-hosting.
• thayne 11mo ago
  I wish articles like this would include recommendations on how to choose hardware to run your self-hosted services on.
  • schmookeeg 11mo ago
    "More RAM than you think you'll need" -- particularly if you virtualize. :)
    • npodbielski 11mo ago
      Why? I was running like 15 containers on a hardware with 32gb of ram. You could probably safely use disk swap as additional memory for less frequent used applications, though I did not check.
      • schmookeeg 11mo ago
        For my case, and my workload, the answer has always been "RAM is cheap, and swapping sucks" -- but there are folks using Rpi as a NAS platform so really... my anecdote actually sucks upon reflection and I'd retract it if I could. For every clown like me with massive RAM in their colo'd box, there is someone doing better and more amazing things with an ESP32 and a few molecules of RAM :D
  • troupo 11mo ago
    And things like "this is a rack you can use, it will not cost you a kidney, and it will not blow your eardrums out with noise"
  • therealfiona 11mo ago
    What ever you have laying around is a great starting point. It all comes down to what you want to spend vs what you want to host and how you want to host it. You could build a raspberry pi docker swarm cluster and get very far. Heck, a single Pi 5 with 4gb of memory will get you on your way. Or you could use an old computer and get just as far. Or you could use a full blown rack mount server with a real IPMI. Or you could use a VPS and accomplish the same thing in the cloud.
• codegeek 11mo ago
  "start self-hosting more of your personal services." I would make the case that you should also self host more as a small Software/SAAS business and it is not quite the boogeyman that a lot of cloud vendors want you to think. Here is why. Most software projects/businesses don't require the scale and complexity for which you truly need the cloud vendors and their expertise. For example, you don't need Vercel to deploy NextJS or whatever static website or even netlify. You can setup Nginx or Caddy (my favorite) on a simple VPS with Ubuntu etc and boom. For majority of projects, that will do. 90%+ of projects can be self hosted with the following: - A well hardened VPS server with good security controls. Plenty of good articles online on how to do the most important things (remove root login, ssh should only be key based etc). - Setup a reverse proxy like Caddy (my favorite) or Nginx etc. Boom. Static files can now be served. Static websites can be served. No need for CDN etc unless you are talking about millions of requests per day. - Setup your backend/API with something simple like supervisor or even the native systemd. - The same Reverse proxy can also forward requests to backend and other services as needed. Not that hard. - Self host a mysql/postgres database and setup the right security controls. - Most importantly: Setup backups for everything using a script/cron and test them periodically. - IF you really want to feel safe against DOS/DDOS etc, add cloudflare in front of everything. So you end up with: Cloudflare/DNS=>Reverse Proxy (Caddy/Nginx)=>Your App. - You want to deploy ? Git pull should do it for most projects like PHP etc. If you have to rebuild binary, it will be another step but possible. You don't need Docker or containers. They can help but not needed for small to even mid sized projects. Yes, you can claim that a lot of these things are hard and I would say they are not that hard. Majority of projects don't need the web scale or whatever.
  • isodev 11mo ago
    And there is an extra perk: Unlike cloud services, system skills and knowledge are portable. Once you learn how systemd or ufw or ssh works, you can apply it to any other system. I’d even go as far as to say that the time/cost required to say learn the quirks of Docker and containers and layering builds is higher than what is needed to learn how to administer a website on a Debian server.
    • neoromantique 11mo ago
• rwendt1337 11mo ago
  > Radicale (Python, basic web ui, only single user, does not work with apple devices from my experience) it does work with apple devices from my experience
  • sutoor 11mo ago
    I use Radicale with iOS and iPadOS devices and multiple users.
• turtlebits 11mo ago
  Self hosting is great and I'm thankful for all the many ways to run apps on your own infra. The problem is backup and upgrades. I self host a lot of resources, but none I would depend on for critical data or for others to rely on. If I don't have an easy path to restore/upgrade the app, I'm not going to depend on it. For most of the apps out there, backup/restore steps are minimal or non existent (compared to the one liner to get up and running). FWIW, Tailscale and Pangolin are godsends to easily and safely self-host from your home.
  • hamdingers 11mo ago
    What kind of backup solution are you expecting? Every selfhosted app runs in docker, where the backup solution is back up the folders you mounted and the docker-compose.yml. To restore, put the folders back and run docker compose up again. I don't need every app to implement its own thing, that would be a waste of developer time.
    • tracker1 11mo ago
      +1 for the above... all my apps are under /app/appname/(compose and data)... my backup is an rsync script that runs regularly... when I've migrated, I'll compose down, then rsync then rsync to the new server, then compose up... update dns, etc. It's been a pretty smooth process. No, it's not a multi-region k8s cluster with auto everything.. but you can go a long way with docker-compose files that are well worth it.
    • turtlebits 11mo ago
      That doesn't work for databases unless you stop the container. You'll likely end up with a corrupt backup.
      • esseph 11mo ago
        Streaming replication to a read-only DB off-site. Shut that one down and back it up from time to time. Then copy that to a third site with rsync/etc
      • 11mo ago
• abdullahkhalids 11mo ago
  20 years ago grandpa could go to limewire.com, download setup.exe and click next->next->next to install a fully functional file hosting server+client. It was so easy that 1/3rd of world's computers had limewire installed in 2007 [1]. ONE FUCKING THIRD! Today, to install even the simplest self-hosted software, one has to be effectively a professional software engineer. Use SSH, Use Docker, use tailscale, understand TLS and generate certificates, Perform maintenance updates, check backups, and million things that are automatable. No idea why self-hosted software isn't `apt-get install` and forget. Just like Limewire. But that's the reason no one self-hosts. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LimeWire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LimeWire
  • neoromantique 11mo ago
    >No idea why self-hosted software isn't `apt-get install` and forget. Just like Limewire. But that's the reason no one self-hosts. Security. As an avid self-hoster with a rack next to my desk, I shudder as I read your comment, unfortunately.
    • arich 11mo ago
      The core point is valid. As someone who self hosts, it's become so complicated to get the most basic functionality setup that someone with little to no knowledge would really struggle whereas years ago it was much simpler. Functionally now we can do much more but practically, we've regressed.
      • dlisboa 11mo ago
        Putting something on the Internet by yourself has always been outside the reach of a non-tech person. Years ago regular people weren't deploying globally available complex software from their desktops either.
      • jimmaswell 11mo ago
        What's so complicated? I'm currently on DigitalOcean but I've self-hosted before. My site is largely a basic LAMP setup with LetsEncrypt and a cron job to install security updates. Self-hosting that on one of my machines would only be a matter of buying a static IP and port forwarding.
• thire 11mo ago
  I have been so happy moving out of Google Photos and storing everything on my NAS + cloud backup. I don't have to worry about Google re-encoding my videos and not letting me get my originals back.
• tamimio 11mo ago
  Self hosting is great, but I am more interested in decentralized technology, whether as services or even radio. I think in the near future the world will experience major disruptions, technical, financial, or even political, that centralized solutions are rendered useless, and the average person would rather have a local connection instead (local as in both topology and physical medium, so you have your own wifi station serving the neighborhood for example), and of course self hosting will be part of it, but there should be protocols that support it either in software or hardware, so it would be great for example you host your xyz chat server instance and within the client side (phones for example) you switch to local mode in the app and connect to local server. I know some applications have already implemented this but not yet adopted and still too niche for the average person, let alone for other services besides chats. Some have already caught the potential and started making ideas around it, bitchat is an example, but relying on Bluetooth won't really do it in my opinion, instead, users would be having their own 5G BTS managed and operated locally, with an option to connect to nearby 5G networks, or similar tech like wimax.
  • npodbielski 11mo ago
    You think civilisation will go down but you will still be able to chat with people via smartphone?
    • tamimio 11mo ago
      Decline usually happens gradually. I highly doubt a coronal mass ejection will fry up all the electronics on earth, or I hope not at least.
  • throwzasdf 11mo ago
    [dead]
• fridder 11mo ago
  I do wonder if there is a market for a preinstalled self hosting computer or setup where the service would be automated backups, e2e encrypted of course, and perhaps high availability
  • jopsen 11mo ago
    Security updates. And fixing things when they eventually break. Honestly, there is a reason I still use a dreamhost shared plan. It's dirt cheap, been running forever, and I've never had to do the boring stuff. And if they break my app, I can ask them to fix it. If you deploy your app on a PaaS you still have to update everything inside the container. Old school php hosting on a shared server does have some upsides - namely affordable support. (Sure, if I'm an extreme edge case support will not do much for me). The same kind of thing for "self-hosting" would be cool.
  • EvanAnderson 11mo ago
    Synology and likely other NAS vendors are basically doing this. A buddy of mine isn't any kind of Linux sysadmin but he's running his whole home media management setup as Docker containers on a Synology NAS. I assume they have off-site backup services available, too.
• tylerjl 11mo ago
  Another sort-of-recent development in the space has made self-hosting dramatically more accessible: even though hardware costs were reasonable before, they're now _very_ reasonable and also resource-efficient. Repurposing an old tower would offer you enough compute to self-host services back in the day, but now an Intel NUC has plenty of resources in a very small footprint and branching out into the Raspberry Pi-adjacent family of hardware also offers even smaller power draw on aarch64 SBCs. One experiment in my own lab has been to deploy glusterfs across a fleet of ODroid HC4 devices to operate a distributed storage network. The devices sip small amounts of power, are easy to expand, and last week a disk died completely but I swapped the hardware out while never losing access to the data thanks to separate networked peers staying online while the downed host got new hardware. Relying on container deployments rather than fat VMs also helps to compress resource requirements when operating lots of self-hosted services. I've got about ~20 nomad-operated services spread across various small, cheap aarch64 hosts that can go down without worrying about it because nomad will just pick a new one.
  • OkayPhysicist 11mo ago
    Hardware's hasn't been the issue (at least for the 15 or so years I've been doing server tinkering). The problem is ISPs. They don't want to give me a static IP address, and they don't want to give me even half-decent upload bandwidth.
• jimangel2001 11mo ago
  My selfhosted stack includes: 1. immich 2. jellyfin 3. ghost 4. wallabag 5. freshrss 6. vaultwarden 7. nextcloud 8. overleaf/sharelatex 9. matrix server 10. pds for atproto
  • jopsen 11mo ago
    How do you upgrade to new versions? How do ship security patches? How do backup? And do you regularly test your backup? I feel like upgrade instructions for some software can be extremely light, or require you to upgrade through each version, or worse.
    • jimangel2001 11mo ago
      1. Watchtower 2. ? 3. ZFS duplicated pool with synced r-sync of snapshots on hetzner cloud 4. I don't really care about most of the upgrades because everything is behind a vpn.
    • import 11mo ago
      Not the OP. I assume everything running in docker. For containers: Upgrading new versions can be done headless by watchtower or manually. For the host: You can run package updates regularly or enable unattended upgrades. Backups can be easily done with cron + rclone. It is not a magic. I personally run everything inside docker. Less things to concern.
      • nicce 11mo ago
        nixOS is great as host. If updates break something, either update does not go through or you just rollback to previous version. And all configuration in a single file.
        • udev4096 11mo ago
          I have been trying to move from proxmox + arch VMs to incus + nixos VMs. Really love the idea of functional programs as a config but the upfront cost of getting familiar with it is quite high but seems to be worth it
• R_Spaghetti 11mo ago
  You write: I'm fortunate enough to work at a company (enum.co) where digital sovereignty is not just a phrase. info.addr.tools shows [1]: MX 1 smtp.google.com. TXT "mailcoach-verification=a873d3f3-0f4f-4a04-a085-d53f70708e84" TXT "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all" TXT "google-site-verification=TTrl7IWxuGQBEqbNAz17GKZzS-utrW7SCZbgdo5tkk0" This is not just a phrase, it is a DNS entry. Using the most evil in phrases of digital sovereignty. [1] https://info.addr.tools/enum.co https://info.addr.tools/enum.co
  • gregsadetsky 11mo ago
    To be fair to enum, the services they sell are around k8, an s3-equivalent, and devops. If they sold/promised self-hosting/sovereign email services, and then were "caught" using gmail, that might be a different story. Your point stands - they're not fully completely independent. And maybe the language in the OP's article could have been different.. but the OP also specifically says "Oh no, I said the forbidden phrase: Self-hosted mail server. I was always told to never under any circumstances do that. But it's really not that deep." They're aware of the issue, everyone is aware of the issue. It's an issue :-) But I get your point too.
    • kachapopopow 11mo ago
      I think it would be fair for them to use something like proton or enterprise msft relay service. Actually this is only for inbound mail, it can be self hosted without any issues, spf on the other hand (outbound verification) does need a relay at minimum.
  • chronci739 11mo ago
    > This is not just a phrase, it is a DNS entry. Using the most evil in phrases of digital sovereignty. damn, this guy don’t fuck around. respect
  • auspiv 11mo ago
    Email is the one notable exception for self hosting. I self host everything, but let email be handled by 3rd parties.
• BinaryIgor 11mo ago
  "Many many years ago I was running an Android phone with Google services like Google Maps. One day I was looking for a feature in my Google account and saw that GMaps recorded my location history for years with detailed geocoordinates about every trip and every visit. I was fascinated but also scared about that since I've never actually enabled it myself. I do like the fact that I could look up my location for every point in time but I want to be in control about that and know that only I have access to that data." This made me thing whether there are any services (or ideas thereof) that would provide this kind of functionality but story encrypted in a similar way as proton does for email; in theory, you can use this pattern - data stored but encrypted on the server, but decrypted only by the client - to rebuild many useful services while retaining full sovereignty of your data.
  • floundy 11mo ago
    What you’re describing is essentially how Apple Maps works. https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/apple-maps/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/apple-maps/
  • ikawe 11mo ago
    One tricky thing about maps, as they relate to privacy, is that the earth is large. Compare that to encrypted email: if I’m sending you an encrypted message, the total data involved is minimal. To a first approximation, it’s just the message contents. But if I want “Google Maps but private,” I first need access to an entire globe’s worth of data, on the order of terabytes. That’s a lot of storage for your (usually mobile) client, and a lot of bandwidth for whoever delivers it. And that data needs to be refreshed over time. Typical mapping applications (like Google Maps) solve this with a combination of network services that answer your questions remotely (“Tell me what you’re searching for, and I’ll tell you where it is.”) and by tiling data so your client can request exactly what it needs, and no more, which is also a tell. The privacy focused options I see are: 1. Pre-download all the map data, like OrganicMaps [1], to perform your calculations on the device. From a privacy perspective, you reveal only a coarse-grained notion of the area you’re interested in. As a "bonus", you get an offline maps app. You need to know a priori what areas you’ll need. For directions, that's usually fine, because I’m usually looking at local places, but sometimes I want to explore a random spot around the globe. Real-time transit and traffic-adaptive routing remain unaddressed. 2. Self-host your own mapping stack, as with Headway (I work on Headway). For the reasons above, it’s harder than hosting your own wiki, but I think it’s doable. It doesn’t currently support storing personal data (where you’ve been, favorite places, etc.), but adding that in a privacy conscious way isn’t unfathomable. [1] https://organicmaps.app https://organicmaps.app (though there are others) [2] https://github.com/headwaymaps/headway https://github.com/headwaymaps/headway (see a hosted demo at https://maps.earth https://maps.earth)
• igor47 11mo ago
  Thank you for writing this! I've been playing around with writing something similar and I getting lost going way too far up the concept chain. Like, ultimately, I self host because... Capitalism? In my ideal world, one tech savvy person would run services for a group of their friends and family. This makes the concept more mainstream and accessible, while also creating social cohesion for that group. I think we've monetized too many of our relationships, and often have no real reason to be in community. This is a big change from most of human history, where you depended on community for survival. Building lower-stakes bonds now (I run your email, you help me fix my car) helps avoid the problem later when you really need help (old, sick) but have never practiced getting anything you need except by paying for it
• TuxSH 11mo ago
  For self-use author has a point, but for public-facing sites not so much, because: - infra work is thankless (see below) - outages will last long because you're unlikely to have failovers (for disk failures, etc.), plus the time to react to these (no point in being paged for hobby work) - more importantly, malicious LLM scrapers will put your infra under stress, and - if you host large executable you'll likely want to do things like banning Microsoft's IP address because of irresponsible GH Actions users [1] [2] [3] In the end it is just a lot less stress to pay someone else to deal with infra; for example, when hosting static sites on GH Pages or CF Pages, and when using CF caching solutions. [1] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/28/microsofts_github_gmp_project/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/28/microsofts_github_gmp... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36380325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36380325 [3] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/7901 https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/7901
  • rob_c 11mo ago
    Only worth paying if you actually need it though. And if it's a hobby, no you don't, that should be part of it, the fun is getting nocked out from orbit and figuring out how and why and how to avoid it. Stand back up again and you've learned from that mistake :p
  • trenchpilgrim 11mo ago
    We used to host production websites this way as recently as 10-15 years ago just fine. These days you can do it with as few as two machines and a good router or two. The main risk is power outages due to non-redundant power outside of a colo (solvable with a battery backup) and non-redundant public internet links (potentially solvable with a cellular failover + a lot of caching at the CDN, depending on the application). You generally still use a CDN and WAF to filter incoming traffic when you self host (even without abusive scrapers you should probably do this for client latency). You can also serve large files from a cloud storage bucket for external users where it makes sense.
• rob_c 11mo ago
  Cost, experience and for the paranoid (right or not) control. The biggest downside is initial cost in time, effort and cash compared to typing in a credit card. Ok other downsides include lack of power redundancy and decent networking which are more common in data-centers. Other side of this is, why buy 8xa100 for that project to stick them on eBay to recoup cost when you can rent them?
  • kdawkins 11mo ago
    Agreed - Effort/Cost/Time is what always nips my self-host projects out of the gate. I start working down the recursive thought experiment of everything I "need" to get an email server working (for example) and bail when I see the list. Convincing the family to buy in is hard too because (as you put) I can't promise the same level of redundancy/service guarantees.
• fourseventy 11mo ago
  I'm currently self hosting my notes/journal/knowledge base with Trilium, photos with Immich, and files with File Browser, very happy with that setup so far. I just like the feeling of knowing I own my important data and that it won't go away because some third party company goes out of business or sunsets an app.
• prism56 11mo ago
  I selfhost only things that aren't critical, I'm not hosting passwords or photos. I'd rather pay for the redundancy offered by big datacentres. I do however choose platforms that are privacy first, ente.io/Proton for example. I do however selfhost FreshRSS, Audiobooks, Readeck, Linkding, YoutubetoRSS... Useful services that individually hosted playforms want £5 or so per month to use. The redundancy is significantly less important with these services to me compared to losing £30+ extra a month.
  • trenchpilgrim 11mo ago
    I self host photos, but my backups are cloud hosted. A cold rarely accessed backup is way cheaper and more fungible across providers than an entire photos app.
    • prism56 11mo ago
      Yeah that's fair enough. Valid approach, I went away from this due to getting family on my ente plan. I didn't want to be responsible/trusted with their images. This way the images are pretty well protected in ente's infrastructure and we can share in the same platform.
      • trenchpilgrim 11mo ago
        True, I only host my own photos, I don't want to possess anyone else's selfies or family photos for sure
• jdoe1337halo 11mo ago
  Self hosting is awesome. I have been doing it for about a year since I quit my full time SWE job and pursued SaaS. I am using Coolify on a $20/month Hetzner server to host a wide variety of applications: Postgres, Minio (version before community neuter) for S3, Nuxt application, NextJs applications, Umami analytics, Open WebUI, and static sites. It was definitely a learning process, but now that I have everything set up, it really is just plug and play to get a new site/service up and running. I am not even using 1/4 of my server resources either (because I don't have many users xd). It is great. https://coolify.io/docs/ https://coolify.io/docs/
• Steltek 11mo ago
  What I think is missed in self-hosting is WHAT you're self-hosting. In priority order, you should self-host: 1. Your Data. It is the most irreplaceable digital asset. No one should see their photos, their email, their whatever, go poof because of external forces. Ensure everything on your devices is backed up to a NAS. Set a reminder for quarterly offline backups. Backups are an achievable goal for everyone, not just the tech elite. 2. Your Identity. By which I mean a domain name. Keep the domain pseudonymous. Use a trustworthy, respectable registrar. Maybe give some thought for geopolitics these days. Pay for email hosting and point your domain at them. 3. Lastly, your Apps. This is much harder work and only reasonably achievable by tech savy people.
• deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
• jcon321 11mo ago
  We self host everything at our company as we're a data center - all the tools required for a modern development stack + modern environments. It's great for learning and control - it's not so great for anxiety.
• FinnKuhn 11mo ago
  While this is only one data point, looking at the stats for r/selfhosted, self-hosting seems to be exploding in popularity since last year. The subreddit now has 2.2 on average million daily unique visitors with 175 million total views over the last 12 months, which is up 132 million visitors in comparison to the 12 months before.
• renegat0x0 11mo ago
  I self host my Search Engine / RSS reader. I track every page I visit from nearly all devices. Since my basic search engine is self hosted nobody actually sees what I visit, and what I watch. This is my conclusion seeing that social media algorithm is totally lost at what I would like to watch next. Also I am in control over UI, and changes, which is a good and a bad thing
• Ingon 11mo ago
  I also started self-hosting more and more. But instead of making services available on the internet/intranet (e.g. VPS reverse proxy/tailscale), I'm binding them to localhost and using connet [1] (cloud or self-host [2]) to cast these locally on my on my PC/phone (when I need them). These include my NAS and Syncthing instance running on my NAS and I'm looking to add more. [1] https://connet.dev https://connet.dev [2] https://github.com/connet-dev/connet https://github.com/connet-dev/connet
• alexchantavy 11mo ago
  In recent years I noticed RSS has gotten way less popular, even in hacker circles (or maybe that's just my perception). I remember browsers used to have a native RSS button in the main interface and then you could curate your feed. Seems better than any news feed thing gamified to steal my attention. Sigh. old-man-yells-at-cloud.gif
• deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
• jeppester 11mo ago
  I build myself a fedora coreos based nextcloud instance with encrypted backup to S3: https://github.com/jeppester/coreos-nextcloud https://github.com/jeppester/coreos-nextcloud In short you fill in the env-files, then run butane and ignition. (I should improve the README some time) I love how it's all configuration. If it breaks I can set up another instance with the same secrets in minutes. It will then grab the latest backup and continue like nothing happened.
• oxalorg 11mo ago
  I left my Hetzner VPS open to password logins for over 3 years, no security updates, no firewalls, no kernel updates, no apt upgrades; only fail2ban and I survived: https://oxal.org/blog/my-vps-security-mess/ https://oxal.org/blog/my-vps-security-mess/ Don't be me, but have some solace in the fact that even if you royally mess up things won't be as bad as you think. I self host a lot of things on a VPS and have recently started self hosting on a raspberry pi 5, it's extremely liberating!
  • breakingcups 11mo ago
    You have no idea whether your server is currently actively compromised and participating in a botnet.
• cowpig 11mo ago
  selfhostyour.tech
• pigpag 11mo ago
  [dead]
• 6ak74rfy 11mo ago
  I too care a lot about privacy and data sovereignty but those aren't sufficient arguments to self-host. For instance, my wife cares about the two too and so she uses most of the services that I host at my home, but she isn't going to start self-hosting herself anytime soon. I think the missing piece is you need to enjoy the process itself - without that, it's not really tenable (at least today).
• octo888 11mo ago
  [warning: old man rants at clouds] Maybe I'm getting old, but I think at this stage I want the third, often-unspoken route: no data. Let go of things No need for infrastructure when you have nothing to host. And data that doesn't exist is the most secure in the world. Is my home a home – or the premises of a small-business? Racks, servers, cables, smart devices, the fan noise etc! It does feel like we are operating our lives more and more like a small business these days: managing data, managing logins, "B2B" with hundreds of companies (EULAs, contracts, invoices, subscriptions...), files, archives, backups, contacts, appointments, app after app after app...on and on. I wish life were simpler. Maybe a lot is in our control, more than we realise
• j23n 11mo ago
  I've stepped back from self-hosting after realizing that 90% of my use case was to keep calendar/contacts/files/photos/passwords in sync between my laptop and phone. I'm now experimenting with a files-based approach, using syncthing for the p2p syncing, and it works really well. No VPS or home server to setup and maintain, no security worries, no database migrations, no extra backups, no tinkering with Caddy configs.
  • seec 11mo ago
    Yes that's what I think as well. The problem is that we have all been tricked into cloud syncing because big tech couldn't figure out proper local sync and they actually have incentives not to because they would really like you to pay to their subscriptions for storage on which they have great margins. Yet for the vast majority of people what would be needed is just very simple syncing between their phone and personal computer. It should work with a cable for speed but also wirelessly for convenience and that's it. All the crap they add on top is mostly overengineered crap that sometimes doesn't even work and creates interdependence/lock-in.
  • azemetre 11mo ago
    Could you explain how you handle P2P between mobile and web? That’s the one hurdle I can’t figure out.
• aborsy 11mo ago
  Self hosting is much more accessible today. The security issue has not been solved yet though. How do you make available your services to other people? People won’t install VPNs. They are usually okay with authenticating to a web server, so you can put authentication with something like Authentik in front of your reverse proxy. But can you configure this front end security correctly and patch it, and are you sure it doesn’t have easy zero days?
  • elevation 11mo ago
    Your employees/contractors will install your VPN if it's a contingency of employment. If you don't need to serve to the world, this step dramatically limits your attack surface, though you should still use Authentik and TLS.
  • esseph 11mo ago
    front it with a cloudflare tunnel waits for the pitchforks and torches
    • aborsy 11mo ago
      CF terminated TLS and scans the traffic. It makes sense if you host your services on a VPS. If I run my services at home, I don’t want to provide Cloudflare with access to my data.
      • esseph 11mo ago
        It also makes sense if you run public services at home
        • aborsy 11mo ago
          Public in the sense that the actual content is public (like a blog), sure, anyone can access it, so does the reverse proxy). Since it’s public, I Would still take the trouble entirely out to a provider. Public in the sense that the front page is public, and the client still need to authenticate to the service at home, in this case, that does not make sense (the user authenticates to reverse proxy, which authenticates to the service), for the reason I mentioned.
• mikewarot 11mo ago
  If I could host something on an actually secure OS, self hosting might make sense. Given the deliberately crippled choices we're all given, walled gardens with active management are the only somewhat sane options. Self hosting remains untenable for most things because of the legacy of Unix and MS-DOS and the ambient authority model of computing.
• esseph 11mo ago
  Some people here really are truly terrified of self hosting. Huh.
• avmich 11mo ago
  > Big Tech and governments (like with chat control in the EU) want to shine light in every part of your personal life. What would be a way to shine light in every part of their private life?
• kentbrew 11mo ago
  Small typo: under Calendar and Contacts, "let's other" looks like it wants to be "let others."
• throwawaylaptop 11mo ago
  I operate an entire saas with 34 paying smb companies, on namecheap shared hosting. PHP/jQuery. While namecheaps time to first bit is a little longer than some, my saas is still faster than 90% of CRMs I've ever used because that was my main goal when writing it.
• ZebusJesus 11mo ago
  This site had some great links in it, thanks for the share
• rubatuga 11mo ago
  I can testify Radicale works great on iOS devices: https://www.naut.ca/blog/2019/11/16/self-hosting-series-part-3-radicale-server/ https://www.naut.ca/blog/2019/11/16/self-hosting-series-part...
• 1vuio0pswjnm7 11mo ago
  A VPS provider that allows the customer to upload and boot their own custom kernels These kernels could be for _any_ operating system that runs on the hardware, e.g., NetBSD A. This already exists B. This does not exist
• thenthenthen 11mo ago
  I would be interested to read more on hardening your internet exposed home lab and ideas for (off site?) backups!
• daitangio 11mo ago
  Self-hosting is becoming a freedom factor in my humble opinion. I have an hard time hosting my email server, it was not so diffcult 10 years ago and was trivial 20 years ago. The reason is the anti-spam rules and the fact that Google, Microsoft and so on are creating a iron trust to each other, and the little server outside are marked spam by default. Lets encrypt avoided a similar destiny to https connections, but the risk is always out of the window. I mean, https was becoming "pay-us-to-publish a web server, or our browser will mark you as unsafe and do not display it". I think it is time also to self-host private free chats and possibly other services lik DDoS services.
• pengfeituan 11mo ago
  Excellent topic, I can offer a perspective from my own experience. The biggest benefit of running a homelab isn't cost savings or even data privacy, though those are great side effects. The primary benefit is the deep, practical knowledge you gain. It's one thing to read about Docker, networking, and Linux administration; it's another thing entirely to be the sole sysadmin for services your family actually uses. When the DNS stops working or a Docker container fails to restart after a power outage, you're the one who has to fix it. That's where the real learning happens. However, there's a flip side that many articles don't emphasize enough: the transition from a fun "project" to a "production" service. The moment you start hosting something critical (like a password manager or a file-syncing service), you've implicitly signed up for a 24/7 on-call shift. You become responsible for backups, security patching, and uptime. It stops being a casual tinker-toy and becomes a responsibility. This is the core trade-off: self-hosting is an incredibly rewarding way to learn and maintain control over your data, but it's not a free lunch. You're trading the monetary cost of SaaS for the time and mental overhead of being your own IT department. For many on HN, that's a trade worth making.
• underlines 11mo ago
  Even though I work as an IT Professional, I was almost always the only person not self hosting anything at home and not having a NAS. I jumped the hoop and bought a Ugreen nas with 4 bays where the first thing I did was installing TrueNAS CE onto it and then use ChatGPT with highly customized prompts and the right context (my current docker-compose files). Without much previous knowledge of docker, networking etc. except what I remembered from my IT vocational education from 15 years ago, I now have: - Dockerized Apps - App-Stacks in their own App-Network - Apps that expose web UI not via ports, but via Traefik + Docker labels - Only Traefik 443 ports reachable from WAN, plus optional port forwarding for non-http services - Optional Cloudflare Tunnel - Automatic Traefik TLS termination for LAN and WAN for my domain - Split-DNS to get hostnames routed properly on LAN and WAN - CrowdSec for all exposed containers - Optional MFA via Cloudflare for exposed services - Local DHCP/DNS via Technitium - Automatic ZFS snapshots and remote backups - Separation between ephemeral App data (DBs, Logs) on SSD and large files on HDD
• zwilliamson 11mo ago
  I think one major improvement in technology that allows self hosting in the year 2025 is mesh VPN’s like Tailscale. Sure, you could run your own firewall and what not but the mesh VPN with it’s simple set up. Makes it a whole lot easier to access your home services.
• pqs 11mo ago
  With Delta Chat nowadays you can easily host your own federated and secure chat service. It is great.
  • mixcocam 11mo ago
    Absolutely. I got mine setup in less than 20 min. https://danneskjold.de https://danneskjold.de
• alance 11mo ago
  Felt like a ramble: I've gone through a few different incarnations of self-hosting email and web over the years. - Used to have a little rack machine sitting in a data center (that I would occasionally have to go and "fix" in the middle of the night, because flakey KVM). It was running Openvz (sort of a precursor to lxc/docker) to host my web projects and email. I think it was about $70 per month to host (this was maybe about 2009ish) - At some point I moved things over to servers in Vultr, and then later, EC2 in AWS. And was quite happy for say, a decade or so. Accessing email meant ssh-ing over to a tmux session that was running mutt on the mail server. Email setup was postfix, procmail, bogofilter, mutt. Costs were more like $30-40 per month. I never liked having web-accessible servers "out there" that needed to be looked after, but I did my best to keep them locked down and actually, everything went fine. Ssh on a non-standard port with TOTP 2FA seemed to work very well. - Recently my email has gone sort of "serverless" (big double-quotes there) and my web projects are now all AWS lambda functions sitting behind API Gateways + Cloudfront for static items. Email is AWS SES delivering to an S3 bucket which gets polled by a super basic script running in my local home network. All my personal boxes (including my phone) are connected via wireguard (VPN) so I realised I don't actually need to have any globally accessible linux servers anymore (i.e. I can access email at home from anywhere via wireguard on my laptop/phone). The monthly bill is a couple of dollars (with billing alerts in AWS), and I like having less machines to worry about.
• huksley 11mo ago
  Unfortunately, it is not realistic to have all the apps we frequently use as self-hosted. Mail, Instagram, etc, come to mind, all social apps. I wish I could have a way to live sync between a cloud service and my own infrastructure, not only as a backup, and as a way to query that data.