703
submitted 4 months ago by Mubelotix@jlai.lu to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Cyber@feddit.uk 7 points 4 months ago

Not really.

Depending on how you install things, the package maintainers usually deal with this, so your next apt update / pacman -Syuv or ... whatever Fedora does... would capture it.

If you've installed this as a container... dunno.. whatever the container update process is (I don't use them)

[-] psoul@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I indeed use a container. Wasn’t familiar with the update process for containers but now know how to do it.

[-] ButtDrugs@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 months ago

There's a lot of good container management solutions out there that are worth investigating. They do things like monitor availability, resource management, as well as altering on versioning.

[-] hellequin67@piefed.social 1 points 4 months ago

Can highly recommend dockhand happily runs my full docker stack with updates and great overviews of what's happening under the hood.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 4 months ago

Lol it's already insecure then. Don't bother.

[-] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Implying you have access to some major Docker 0-day exploit, or just talking out of your ass? Because a container is no more or less secure than the machine it runs on. At least if a container gets compromised, it only has access to the volumes you have specifically given it access to. It can’t just run rampant on your entire system, because you haven’t (or at least shouldn’t have) given it access to your entire system.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 4 months ago

Docker is known insecure. It doesn't verify any layers it pulls cryptography. The devs are aware. The tickets remain open.

[-] def@aussie.zone 1 points 4 months ago

If that is indeed true it would only mean that the docker container is vulnerable to a supply chain attack. You are not any more vulnerable to a vulnerability in the codebase.

If you’re using the ghcr image, to post malicious code there, the attack would have already had to compromise their github infra … which would likely result in the attacker being able to push malicious code to git or publish malicious releases. Their linux distro packages are self published via a ppa/install script, which I would assume just pull from their github releases, so a bad github release would immediately be pulled as an update by users just as fast as a container.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

No, it's also vulnerable to a targeted mitm attack. Github can be unaffected and you can get a malicious version on your server.

[-] psoul@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I don't know if I remember correctly but I could not install Jellyfin on the latest Ubuntu server version. I had to use docker to get Jellyfin running.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

Jellyfin has a Debian repo. Worked fine on Debian 12 and 13.

[-] mpramann@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago

Insane way of thinking.

[-] communism@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

If you haven't already, I recommend Watchtower (nickfedor fork—the original is unmaintained) which automatically pulls updates to Docker containers and restarts them. Make sure to track latest, although for security updates, these should be backported to any supported versions so it's fine to track an older supported version too.

[-] psoul@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Thank you. Will look into it.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 3 points 4 months ago

Unattended upgrades set to security only and never worry

[-] Cyber@feddit.uk 6 points 4 months ago

It's difficult to do security-only updates when the fix is contained within a package update.

Even Microsoft's security updates are a mix with secuirity updates containing feature changes and vice versa.

I usually do an update on 1 random device / VM and if that was ok (inc. watching for any .pacnew files) and then kick Ansible into action for the rest.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

Why does unattended upgrades with security only setting not fix this?

This is literally why Debian has distinct repos for security updates.

[-] Cyber@feddit.uk 1 points 4 months ago

Let me know which repo this update appears in.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

The jellyfin repo

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
703 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

61708 readers
420 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS