Does anyone have any experience with #authentik in terms of #homelab ?
Uncategorized
4
Posts
4
Posters
0
Views
-
Does anyone have any experience with #authentik in terms of #homelab ?
My Idea is to use it to secure all my services with #mfa even if they don't support it.
Interested in how this has worked for others.
#askFedi -
Does anyone have any experience with #authentik in terms of #homelab ?
My Idea is to use it to secure all my services with #mfa even if they don't support it.
Interested in how this has worked for others.
#askFedi@thewk i found it a little big and ended up deploying pocket id instead
-
Does anyone have any experience with #authentik in terms of #homelab ?
My Idea is to use it to secure all my services with #mfa even if they don't support it.
Interested in how this has worked for others.
#askFedi@thewk I’m looking to do the same thing. My goals are a little broader, though. I want SSO + MFA for all my services and I also want to be an OIDC and SAML identity provider, so I can collaborate and federate with other homelabers, and for any cloud services I still use,
-
Does anyone have any experience with #authentik in terms of #homelab ?
My Idea is to use it to secure all my services with #mfa even if they don't support it.
Interested in how this has worked for others.
#askFedi@thewk yes that's possible. There are 2 ways you can use (and combine). One is using authentik with forward auth via Middleware. That means authentik (and therefore also possible MFA) is shown before you can reach your service. The other way is when your service supports oidc, saml etc. Then authentik is called from that service at login.
-
undefined oblomov@sociale.network shared this topic
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
I think some people were using PMs for potentially sensitive info (addresses, Venmo, etc.), and having them slightly more secure puts people at ease.
What about standard public-key stuff, dropping a short public key in a metadata field, keeping the private key on the endpoint or in the client?
-
@scottjenson not at all critical.
Hint: you could re-run this as a poll, for the question.
-
@evan the already improved UX looks good, to me.
When drafting a reply to a public toot, the word 'Public' is prominent (first screenshot).
When drafting a mention, the separation is clear (second shot).
Without being blasé about privacy: if a person accidentally publishes in either of those contexts, it's human error.
-
And.. you probably know, but just in case:
We have a solid spec for E2EE on the Fediverse now (https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-e2ee/mls) with #Emissary and #Bonfire launching later this year.
As you'd expect with end-to-end-encryption, *most* of the work is on the browser/client. The AP server changes are minimal: a new KeyPackage object to store, a new collection, & other small stuff.
When we have working JS code, it'll be AGPL, and you could use it as a baseline for Mastodon 😎
-
@scottjenson I rarely use them due to the UX fears, encryption would be a cherry on top
-
@scottjenson And on encryption, I think you could probably launch with UX improvements only, and leave encryption as a "fast follow". E2EE might not be *critical* but it's a *super-nice-to-have* ~ especially on today's internet.
The fact that we call them "direct messages" isn't enough; people have a natural expectation of privacy when they send DMs, and the Fediverse doesn't really honor that right now.
The more systems we can make "secure by default" the better.
-
@scottjenson Hey Scott! I'm so glad you're tackling this issue. I have lots of trouble with DMs on Mastodon. I think you're addressing, these, but here goes:
The biggest one is how easily they're confused with regular messages. I routinely mess this up, and make private messages public, or vice versa.
The next is how hard it is to visualize threads - especially in the existing notification section. I often lose my place in complex discussions
-
@scottjenson I think making UX improvements to DMs is a great idea.
One of the biggest privacy problems with Mastodon DMs now is that people accidentally make them public.
Separating the private mention UI from the public posting UI will probably avoid a huge percentage of those user errors.
It'd be a big win for privacy.
