this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
90 points (96.9% liked)

Selfhosted

49661 readers
1030 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello,

Some time ago, I started self-hosting applications, but only on my local network. So far, it's working fine, but I can't access them as soon as I go outside (which is completely normal).

For the past few days I've been looking for a relatively secure way of accessing my applications from outside.

I don't need anyone but myself to have access to my applications, so from what I've understood, it's not necessarily useful to set up a reverse-proxy in that case and it would be simpler to set up a VPN.

From what I've seen, Wireguard seems to be a good option. At first glance, I'd have to install it on the machine containing my applications, port-forward the Wireguard listening port and configure my other devices to access this machine through Wireguard

However, I don't have enough hindsight to know whether this is a sufficient layer of security to at least prevent bots from accessing my data or compromising my machine.

I've also seen Wireguard-based solutions like Tailscale or Netbird that seem to make configuration easier, but I have a hard time knowing if it would really be useful in my case (and I don't really get what else they are doing despite simplifying the setup).

Do you have any opinions on this? Are there any obvious security holes in what I've said? Is setting up a VPN really the solution in my case?

Thanks in advance for your answers!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 48 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (14 children)

Run WireGuard on some home machine. (Does not need to be the machine the app you want to access is hosted on.)

Run WireGuard on your road warrior system.

There is no step 3.

I'm doing this right now from halfway around the world from my house and it's been great. Been using iPhone, iPad, and macOS clients connected to linuxserver/WireGuard docker container. Been doing this on many WiFi networks and 5G, no difference.

[–] waterproof@sh.itjust.works 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Okay, so that's pretty much the setup I had in mind. Good to know there is not much need for an extra step for security, thanks for the answer !

Well, I guess that would still be vulnerable to DDOS attacks, but that would just prevent me from accessing my cinnamon apple-pie recipe from my self hosted recipe manager for some time. A bit mean, but not catastrophic.

I wondered if there would be some other attacks that could compromise my machine with only a wireguard setup, but that's a good sign if there is nothing obvious.

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

You wouldn't be any more vulnerable to ddos attacks than without WG.

load more comments (12 replies)