Comment

Comment on ISP put me behind NAT

<- View Parent

tal@lemmy.today ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

While I use ssh tunneling to access systems on a temporary basis, usually http, some caveats:

I don’t know of a daemon to set up locally that will re-establish tunnels on power loss and the like. Not technically-difficult, but something one probably wants if this is going to be how he’s gonna get at the system long-term rather than “I just need one-off access”.
One other downside – the service that the user here is aiming to expose is apparently ssh. For me – reaching an http server – wrapping the connection for remote use is desirable. For him, it probably isn’t, as there’ll be two layers of encryption. Not the end of the world, but it’s a hit.

source

Sort:hotnew top

kokesh@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I need more ports to be exposed - I’m running secure DNS, Git on one port, Webmin on other, Jelllyfin (I can live without that on data), HTTP server on 800/443, Homeassistant 8123,… I also had 3389 open for remote desktop to my Windows machine, etc.

source
- grenndel@lemmy.ca ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  You can reduce some of those ports by using a reverse proxy. Do that you can access git home assistant etc from 443 with a subhuman.
  
  source
nucleative@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
For reestablishing the connection, use the wrapper ‘autossh’. It can be run from systemd so that it’ll auto start and restart as you command it.

I have a couple instances using this that are absolutely rock solid after years.

source
- kglitch@kglitch.social ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  How does the data throughput compare to cloudflare or wireguard?
  
  source
  - tal@lemmy.today ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I’m the grandparent commenter, not the parent commenter, but for my very limited use, it’s not noticeable, but I’m also typically just giving a remote machine access to a local web service. I’m not trying to tunnel anything bulk (or where latency is critical, which I’d think might be a larger issue).
    
    The one thing I can say, though, without digging up numbers: ssh is fundamentally TCP-based. It forces ordering on anything it transports. While there are ways to cram UDP through an SSH tunnel, if you want to provide access to anything that natively runs on UDP, I’d probably look into a VPN – like Wireguard – that doesn’t do that.
    
    source
  - nucleative@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Haven’t done any comparisons, but I’m using this in cases where my throughput isn’t too important. I can stream my webcam over it in HD, establish an rdp connection, ssh back through, and control web interfaces like octoprint. It’s acceptable.
    
    The big advantage is that a $2/month vps gets a static IP, therefore I don’t have to worry about a VPN provider changing the IP or blocking ports.
    
    Tunneling an encrypted connection through an encrypted connection is pretty much always a bad idea but when you’re evading CGnat or other network blocks, sometimes it’s the best we can conjure up on a whim.
    
    source