go2rtc, a camera streaming tool that's useful for security cameras, at least has some humor in their choice
port 1984, of course.
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
448 points (98.5% liked)
memes
16906 readers
2667 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Okay, that's pretty good.
Doesn't matter; we'll map it to whatever the environment needs in the docker-compose.yaml.
Unix sockets all the way. The only open ports for web traffic should be the reverse proxy (so nginx).
Or Caddy (simpler than and imho spiritual successor to nginx).
Or Traefik (has loads of convenient middlewares for reverse proxy stuff).
Or Apache (if it is somehow better suited to your use case).
Is haproxy okay?
haproxy is awesome
Haproxy is great, but setup is hard. It’s more for load balancing than being an easy reverse proxy.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use docker ports but only allow the loopback like this: 127.0.0.1:11551:80
And then serve that app with the reverse proxy.
All my homies use :3000
:3
As long as it is configurable, ideally via env, I dont care about the port.
This could be important for restricted Kubernetes clusters (or certain Gluetun configs). Don't be Nextcloud with their default port of 80 in their Apache image with only hacky ways to change that. God, I hate Nextcloud. They are truly becoming the next Wordpress.
Vaulwarden does this and I'm really frustrated that I have to cap_add NET_BIND_SERVICE in my rootless setup just to make my password server run.
Are you sure you need that? I just added a —user to the docker run and it started just fine on port 80 in the container.
I'm using podman, and I don't like the practice of unnecessarily setting UIDs. NET_BIND_SERVICE is exactly the flag it needs to set port 80 and it doesn't potentially complicate accessing the files for maintenance. Does your system have SELinux? If not, that might be why you don't need it lol.
The docker image you just set the port like any other program.
Unless I am missing some obvious setting: Restricted Kubernetes doesnt work like that. You have to run the container with a non-root UID (usually something upwards of a million). Non-root users however can't reserve ports below 1025. Nextcloud builds on the default php-apache image which comes with the default apache ports.conf (Listen 80).
So now this has to be overwritten either by making a custom build (which may require creating a custom build pipeline) or by mounting a new config file (e.g. via ConfigMap) else it wont start. Both are an additional update risk which now has to be documented and checked before updating in addition to changes from the normal nextcloud changelog.
Similiar issues probably appear with rootless docker/podman unless you add extra capabilities, which is not possible in restricted kubernetes settings.
I know nothing about k8s, just started with a homelab using primarily docker in an Ubuntu LXC in proxmox and have been using the nextcloud image via docker compose on a different port by simply editing the compose to outwardly point to a different port, inside the docker container my understanding is it all still uses port 80, thereby causing no further issues with the application.
Welcome to the community then :) For rootful Docker you are correct - the inside port can be 80 and you can expose it on whatever port you want (ideally you expose it only via reverse proxy and not by port - I can recommend Caddy-Docker-Proxy for that)
I use Traefik already, but thank you! :)
Also a great choice :)
Got me curious on rootless vs root docker, there's so much.
Since rootless docker is (mostly) a security improvement, here is a interesting list of other Docker realted security tips I like to consult: https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Docker_Security_Cheat_Sheet.html
If you're using a reverse-proxy, why bother mapping ports at all?
Absolutely, it is not necessary if the proxy can reach the service in other ways (e.g. a shared network). Some non-http services don't like to be proxied though. Some constellations where the proxy is not on the same host as the containers may also make it necessary. My answer was based on the possibility to not have the same inside/outside port, not necessarily the need though😉
adds a one to it
next app...
ports:
- 8081:8081
Ughhhhh
Psh, we choose 443 and you know it! Just don’t ask me if we correctly enabled HTTPS…
Back in the day I home hosted shit using http over 443 because my ISP blocked 80 inbound but not 443. It was a little weird but it worked lmao.
I run ssh over 443 because every network out there seems to block non-http ports.
Call me crazy, but I like default ports to look like default ports. If I want it to stick around, I’ll pick a port on my own.
I mean, if you're serving over http, that is the port for it
Isn't it port 80?
It's both
We apparently could have been using 8008 this entire time for the same thing and we haven't and I'm a little sour now.
Me & the boys serving http on the boob port
I prefer the secure version, boobs.
I'd suckle that server
Imagine using 8081 while 8080 is free. Truly criminal
You also see a fair bit of 8001 iirc
9090
8888
I like 6969
4200 or 10420 too
Nice
That’s because 8080 is the official unprivileged alternative port for 80, the HTTP port. Web developers are usually using HTTP, so this makes perfect sense. If it supports HTTPS, then 8443, though that one isn’t official.
I run a few open source server projects, and they usually default to 8080 for this reason. I have one that uses 8888, and that’s only because it’s meant for temporary ad-hoc servers.
I’m working on an SFTP server, and it will use 2222, because that’s the most common unprivileged alternative port. There is no official alternative for SSH.
Everyone out here acting like they don't use 9001
Me: 5000 it is.
Arg, my Synology servers are down. Thanks.
Hehe.
Can't use 80 or 8080? Lets use 12380!
50501?
view more: next ›