Comment on Homelab upgrade - "Modern" alternatives to NFS, SSHFS?
forbiddenlake@lemmy.world 1 week agoBy default, unencrypted, and unauthenticated, and permissions rely on IDs the client can fake.
May or may not be a problem in practice, one should think about their personal threat model.
Mine are read only and unauthenticated because they’re just media files, but I did add unneeded encryption via ktls because it wasn’t too hard to add (I already had a valid certificate to reuse)
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
NFS is good for hypervisor level storage. If someone compromises the host system you are in trouble.
486@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Not only the host. You have to trust every client to behave, as @forbiddenlake already mentioned, NFS relies on IDs that clients can easily fake to pretend they are someone else. Without rolling out all the Kerberos stuff, there really is no security when it comes to NFS.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
You misunderstand. The hypervisor is the client. Stuff higher in the stack only sees raw storage. (By hypervisors I also mean docker and kubernetes) From a security perspective you just set an IP allow list
486@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Sure, if you have exactly one client that can access the server and you can ensure physical security of the actual network, I suppose it is fine. Still, those are some severe limitations and show how limited the ancient NFS protocol is, even in version 4.