Hacker News Reader

Comment by symlinkk | Hacker News Reader

Plex themselves literally recommend it and show a warning icon if it’s not accessible outside your local network. I always thought it was insane. To make matters worse their Synology package doesn’t auto update itself. I would guess there are a ton of vulnerable boxes sitting out there.

View on HN

If you’re exposing anything on Synology to the Internet, you’re already playing with fire. Their packages (like Container Manager) are usually very far behind on security patches.

I think the current version of Docker engine Synology uses was end-of-life 2.5 years ago.

Yeah, please avoid Synology, really. If you have it or need it DONT expose it to the internet.

Synology NAS - an ugly doorstop with data loss resulting from its half-baked post-purchase attempts to enforce hardware vendor lock-in. (Was working fine w/ a Western Digital drive, the next day, boom.)

I’ve had a synology NAS that’s been running for 8 years. No data loss. I use random drives I had laying around. It’s not the fastest or fanciest, but I never had any experience with lock in. It’s got a 3rd party 10g card, more memory … nothing locked in.

good for you, I hope it lasts another decade+

just sharing my lived experience

It just has to pass through one port, right? Is that the kind of thing that's likely to be vulnerable on an outdated server?

What get me the most, are the rabid Plex fanbois swearing that having jellyfin open on the internet is such a baaaad idea and you should spend ~50~ ~100~ 500 bucks for a sub to Plex which totally don't expose the same risk

I wouldn't go that far. It's just Jellyfin is ugly as shit.

When was the last time you tried it? I used to agree, but at least as of last year, it must've undergone a UI overhaul as now it looks quite nice imo.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com