Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

kn100.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 311 posts

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#241

Post by rubatuga »

nullify88 wrote: post #240
batch12 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true based on my experience with multiple switches and xbox one consoles.

It does depend on the game. A P2P game like Call of Duty will have problems when played simultaneously on more than one console because the external port can not be shared. What happens though is that another external port gets forwarded to 3074 instead. 3074 -> 3074 3075 -> 3074 3076 -> 3074 etc. Its likely uPnP does this automatically as even uPnP won't be able to map multiple devices to the same external port but…

That’s not how NAT works though. It uses random ports, and there are no collisions, unless you have thousands of Xboxes behind a NAT. Also, remember that CGNAT is a thing, with hundreds of households( with dozens of game consoles) all behind a single IP address. Essentially, the people talking about game consoles not working are wrong.

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#243

Post by nix23 »

mavhc wrote: post #67
takeda wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it amusing that many people are convinced that IPv6 is less safe, because there is no NAT, and at the same time use UPnP. No, NAT isn't designed for security, the blocking of incoming traffic is just side effect, you should use a firewall for security.

NAT can mean 2 things, 1 to 1, and 1 to many. Firewall is a concept not a thing. IPv6 could be set up so every computer has an internal address and you choose to map external to internet using 1 to 1 NAT.

Ah yeah the good old IPv6-NAT....

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#244

Post by oriolid »

rubatuga wrote: post #241
nullify88 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does depend on the game. A P2P game like Call of Duty will have problems when played simultaneously on more than one console because the external port can not be shared. What happens though is that another external port gets forwarded to 3074 instead. 3074 -> 3074 3075 -> 3074 3076 -> 3074 etc. Its likely uPnP does this automatically as even uPnP won't be able to map multiple devices to the same external port but…

That’s not how NAT works though. It uses random ports, and there are no collisions, unless you have thousands of Xboxes behind a NAT. Also, remember that CGNAT is a thing, with hundreds of households( with dozens of game consoles) all behind a single IP address. Essentially, the people talking about game consoles not working are wrong.

That is how NAT works for connections opened from private network to the Internet. If the console needs to listen to a port, the NAT must be configured to forward the listened port to correct device. Multiple devices behind NAT can not listen to the same port, and this is where the forwarding of different ports on public IP to same port on different private IPs comes in.

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#245

Post by [deleted] »

rubatuga wrote: post #241
nullify88 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does depend on the game. A P2P game like Call of Duty will have problems when played simultaneously on more than one console because the external port can not be shared. What happens though is that another external port gets forwarded to 3074 instead. 3074 -> 3074 3075 -> 3074 3076 -> 3074 etc. Its likely uPnP does this automatically as even uPnP won't be able to map multiple devices to the same external port but…

That’s not how NAT works though. It uses random ports, and there are no collisions, unless you have thousands of Xboxes behind a NAT. Also, remember that CGNAT is a thing, with hundreds of households( with dozens of game consoles) all behind a single IP address. Essentially, the people talking about game consoles not working are wrong.

[deleted]

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#246

Post by magicalhippo »

ziml77 wrote: post #180
canada_dry wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 for FreeNAS. Its use of ZFS and ability to easily manage multiple "jails" and vms is perfect for a reliable home automation platform! The only major downside I've found thus far it that you cannot pass USB devices selectively to a jail/vm.

I really wish it could do USB passthrough. I need that for home automation to run in a VM under TrueNAS. The solution I've been running for a few years now is to have TrueNAS and Home Assistant running under VMWare ESX. Required getting an HBA that I could pass through to the VM instead of using the ports on the mobo but it works nicely. Having Home Assistant as a guest under TrueNAS would be nicer though. Right now…

I'm looking forward to TrueNAS SCALE[1], which is basically TrueNAS on top of Debian instead of FreeBSD.

Mainly because then my containers can run on the metal rather than being limited by Bhyve.

Currently in Alpha. I fired it up in a VM and it had some rough edges still but did manage to create a pool and fire up some containers.

Been running FreeNAS, now TrueNAS, for several years and been happy with that, but not being able to take full advantage of the hardware due to Bhyve has been a pain point.

[1]: https://www.truenas.com/truenas-scale/

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#247

Post by KozmoNau7 »

Tildey wrote: post #232
devwastaken wrote: post #230

Are there actually good alternatives to consumer NAS that don't break the bank? I'd love to just throw a raspi4b at some HDD's - but no sata, and no ECC. And the hard drives need to be kept safe from their vibrations.

Some USB drives with a Pi is a decent solution, given that the most cost effective option for HDDs is usually shucking WD easystores anyway. USB HDDs usually have decent vibration damping and cooling also. USB might be less ideal than SATA, same with ECC, but you’re also saving a major amount of money, % wise.

Don't do that, you'll have no redundancy in case of disk errors, the performance will be abysmal (Pi4 possibly excluded) and USB drive spindown and SMART support is sketchy at best.

I bought a Fractal Node 304 case (room for 6 drives), put an ITX board in it, a PCIe SATA controller and set it up as btrfs RAID, with CIFS, NFS and FTP. Not a huge outlay and so much better than a hacked-together Pi solution.

It also functions as my DNS and DHCP (Pi-Hole in a Docker container) and since it has hardware video decoding, it works great as an always-on HTPC, which is practical for apartment living.

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#249

Post by Tildey »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #247
Tildey wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some USB drives with a Pi is a decent solution, given that the most cost effective option for HDDs is usually shucking WD easystores anyway. USB HDDs usually have decent vibration damping and cooling also. USB might be less ideal than SATA, same with ECC, but you’re also saving a major amount of money, % wise.

Don't do that, you'll have no redundancy in case of disk errors, the performance will be abysmal (Pi4 possibly excluded) and USB drive spindown and SMART support is sketchy at best. I bought a Fractal Node 304 case (room for 6 drives), put an ITX board in it, a PCIe SATA controller and set it up as btrfs RAID, with CIFS, NFS and FTP. Not a huge outlay and so much better than a hacked-together Pi solution. It also fun…

3 USB drives in a raid setup isn’t any less redundant than 3 SATA drives in the same setup (mathematically anyway, excluding potential bus problems which don’t really seem to be much of an issue these days).

Personally I also have a node 304 based nas, but I’ve seen plenty of people with low cost Pi setups and no major issues. Plugging a few drives into a Pi is much easier if you don’t have experience with building computers, and is still a couple hundred dollars cheaper than something like that.

Also worth noting that it’s possible to connect PCIe devices to a Pi, although I believe you need a specific model.

Re: My NAS exposes itself over the internet without permission

#250

Post by MomoXenosaga »

imwillofficial wrote: post #226
rubatuga wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to choose: security or convenience.

It’s a sliding scale, otherwise you’d run an airgapped network and hand carry your info into and out of your home on CDs...

Reminds me of a state secretary who decided to use gmail because it was more convenient than the secure smartphone provided to him.

Ofcourse for most people who aren't dealing with state secrets convenience is a priority.

Post reply on HN