|
|
|
|
|
by superkuh
1593 days ago
|
|
"Walking around covered in body armor and allowing the military to drive me to work in a tank" is nice protection but it's also very restrictive. I don't think the argument against this is so much that Cloudflare doesn't provide nice features as that those features are entirely unneeded for 99.99% of people hosting from home. The downsides of heavy protection are vastly increased complexity and dependence on a non-'dumb pipe' non-ISP corporation which kind of defeats the point of hosting from home. You really can just host your webserver from home network and forward the port using your consumer grade router and consumer home connection most of the time and nothing bad happens. But this kind of tunneling would be great for when you have a bad ISP that blocks port 80 instead of just saying servers aren't allowed. |
|
I would get worried about somehow enabling access to defects in my router by opening some inbound ports. I realize that's a little paranoid...but recently I have been playing around with https://github.com/threat9/routersploit and routinely find defects in consumer routers.
Here's my other beef with cloudflare: Once I gotta pay 200+/mo for their security services or whatever, I could just rent out a private rack in a colocation and throw some old beefy lga-2011 xeon hosts. Now I don't need anything on my LAN exposed and I have dedicated IPs, physical security, and backup generators...etc.