[-] alan@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It’s assuming theoretical vulnerabilities in Immich.

It's all about the risk matrix. The theoretical likelihood of a vulnerability in Immich might be low, but the severity of that risk is catastrophic in terms of personal data leaking.

The likelihood of a risk in this proxy might be medium or even high according to you, but the severity is low. It doesn't have access to any of your personal data. All it does is talk to Immich via Immich's public sharing API.

This project has zero community support.

One of the contributors to this project is bo0tzz, who is one of the maintainers of Immich.

[-] alan@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

All good points, and Apple has some of the most skilled engineers in the world and The Fappening still happened.

It's not possible for me to audit everything that's happening security-wise in Immich, but I can fully understand what's happening in this small codebase to my own satisfaction. At the end of the day I feel safer knowing that there is no public access to any part of my Immich instance.

It’s also not true that you “never need to touch it again”

I meant that you don't need to use it to share photos, not that you never need to update your docker containers! 😱 Thanks, I have clarified that.

[-] alan@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The security of which URLS are accessible without authentication would be up to immich.

This is exactly the risk I'm wanting to mitigate. Immich is under heavy active development, and I want to abstract away from needing to worry whether the no-auth API URLs are safe to expose publicly.

At the end of the day I feel safer knowing that there is zero public access to any part of my Immich instance, which for me is what really matters.

[-] alan@feddit.org 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You'd still need to allow access to the /api/ path, and even public endpoints could potentially expose you to a vulnerability. It's entirely up to your threat model.

Knowing what happened in 2014 with iCloud, I'm not prepared to take that risk. Especially as Immich is under heavy development and things can often change and move around. At least this way I know that it will either safely fetch the data or simply fail.

[-] alan@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It forwards requests to the other server.

No raw requests are passed to Immich. All incoming data is validated / sanitized. Requests are only made to specific whitelisted API endpoints. I don't know why you're so angry 🤷

[-] alan@feddit.org 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

some dude’s personal project

Yes, it's my project.

if I put it behind something else that forwards traffic to the server then that’s somehow safe!

It doesn't "forward traffic", it validates traffic and answers only valid requests, without needing privileged access to Immich. I think you are confusing the word "proxy" with meaning something like Traefik.

telling me that is more secure. As though that project is better written?

Yes, it's more secure to use this than exposing Immich. No it's not "better written" than Immich; it fulfills a completely different purpose.

It's 400 lines of code in total, feel free to review it and tell me any flaws, oh mighty security expert.

[-] alan@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago

Sorry, off topic, but is this what Immich looks like out of the box, or have you used any other plugins?

No - this is using lightGallery. You can see what Immich looks like on their demo.

[-] alan@feddit.org 30 points 1 week ago

I’m “exposing” my own server either way!

Put it on a different server then. It prevents your Immich server from ever needing to be exposed publicly. That's the entire point.

This is stupid.

You seem to understand neither security nor privacy.

[-] alan@feddit.org 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I get to give you access to all my photos so that you can just proxy calls to my server?

This is a self-hosted app... The only person who has access to your photos is you - that's the entire point of using this. It lets you share photos/videos/albums from Immich without giving anyone access to any part of your Immich server, thus significantly increasing your privacy and security.

It doesn't forward any traffic to Immich, it creates essentially a WAF between the public and Immich. It validates all incoming requests and answers only valid requests, without needing privileged access to Immich.

[-] alan@feddit.org 11 points 1 week ago

Or you could similar just block those routes in whatever reverse proxy you’d use out in front of the server?

You can't. You need to allow public access to your Immich instance's /api/ path to use Immich's built-in sharing.

[-] alan@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You're correct - it is indeed taking input requests and requesting the related data from Immich.

How is this adding more security than any other proxy?

To allow sharing with Immich using a normal reverse proxy like Caddy or Traefik, you need to expose public access to the Immich /api/ path, along with a few other potentially dangerous paths. Any existing or future vulnerability has the potential to compromise your Immich instance.

This proxy is more secure as it does not allow public access to the Immich API path or to any Immich path. The only incoming requests which are honoured are requests like this:

https://your-proxy-url.com/share/ffSw63qnIYMtpmg0RNvOui0Dpio7BbxsObjvH8YZaobIjIAzl5n7zTX5d6EDHdOYEvo

If the shared link does not resolve to something that you have intentionally shared from Immich, it will return a 404.

if Immich is updated with changes that proxy doesn’t have yet, everything breaks.

The only thing which would break it is if Immich changed the format of a few select API endpoints. And if that ever happens it's a very easy fix.

377
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by alan@feddit.org to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

Immich is an amazing piece of software, but because it holds such personal data I have only ever felt comfortable accessing it via VPN or mTLS. This meant that I could never share any photos, which had been really bugging me.

So I built a self-hosted app, Immich Public Proxy, which allows you to share individual files or full galleries to the public without ever exposing your Immich instance. This uses Immich's existing sharing functionality, so other than the initial configuration everything else is handled within Immich.

Why not just expose Immich publicly with Traefik / Caddy / etc?

To share from Immich, you need to allow public access to your /api/ path, which opens you up to potential vulnerabilities. It's up to you whether you are comfortable with that in your threat model.

This proxy provides a barrier of security between the public and Immich. It doesn’t forward traffic to Immich, it validates incoming requests and responds only to valid requests without needing privileged access to Immich.

Demo

You can see a live demo here, which is serving a gallery straight out of my own Immich instance.

Features

  • Supports sharing photos and videos.
  • Supports password-protected shares.
  • Creating and managing shares happens through Immich as normal, so there's no change to your workflow.

Install

Setup takes about 30 seconds:

  1. Take a copy of the docker-compose.yml file and change the address for your Immich instance.

  2. Start the container: docker-compose up -d

  3. Set the "External domain" in your Immich Server Settings to be whatever domain you use to publicly serve Immich Public Proxy. Now whenever you share an image or gallery through Immich, it will automatically create the correct public path for you.

For more detail on the steps, see the docs on Github.

view more: next ›

alan

joined 3 weeks ago