Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Caddy 2

caddyserver.com

211–220 of 247 posts

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#211
post #142

It is nice to see an alternative to Nginx. I am glad that Caddy took a stab at it. It is good that the author is looking to have some kind of stable monetization too. It's hard enough to maintain OSS from time perspective. I hope that it works out for him.

Not the only alternative. There is also wonderful Traefik and hard-to-config Envoy for example :)

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#212
post #206
post #14

Hi HN -- this is what I've been working on for the last 14 months, with the help of many contributors and the backing of several sponsors. (Thank You!) Caddy 2 is a fresh new server experience. Some things might take getting used to, like having every site served over HTTPS unless you specify http:// explicitly in your config. But in general, it will feel familiar to v1 in a lot of ways. If you've used v1 before, I r…

Thank you for Caddy, it has saved me a lot of time and it's a joy to work with. Running it on about 8 boxes. Is there an admin UI for v2? Seeing the configuration changes, it was the first idea that popped, would be great for the selfhosted community - maybe someone picks it up as a side project if it's not in scope.

An admin UI is planned, but it hasn't been started yet. It's not really a top priority, there's plenty of features that are more useful to have first.

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#213
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. It's a bummer. https://go-team.pages.debian.net/packaging.html

Unless I'm missing something, that only says you need to package all dependencies if it is a library. Which means you could make a binary-only statically compiled package without adding a bunch of dependencies right? Of course, that isn't helpful if you need to compile with extra plugins, but in that case you are probably using standard go tools and not apt packages anyway.

See https://github.com/Debian/dh-make-golang/issues/131

We were specifically told that we would need to have all our dependencies packaged. Debian needs to be able to validate that it was built entirely from source code from library packages, not from a binary built externally.

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#214

Is anyone here using Caddy with Dokku? I'd love to replace Nginx with a technology I know.

If you're just using nginx as a reverse proxy in your setup, it's almost certain Caddy can do the job! Come ask for help on the community forums if you need it https://caddy.community

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#215
post #14

Hi HN -- this is what I've been working on for the last 14 months, with the help of many contributors and the backing of several sponsors. (Thank You!) Caddy 2 is a fresh new server experience. Some things might take getting used to, like having every site served over HTTPS unless you specify http:// explicitly in your config. But in general, it will feel familiar to v1 in a lot of ways. If you've used v1 before, I r…

Thanks Matt! TLS endpoint, web server, load balancer, reverse proxy all in one. Rock solid uptime measured in years. I run it on every machine ;)

Am curious what tools you use for testing Caddy: generating traffic for load testing, web fuzzing, net simulation, etc?

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#216
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I was trying to explain that during my initial browsing of the Caddy site, I found several references to using the API endpoints to configure Caddy, but nothing in the same places to say how to secure it or whether it was enabled by default. I wasn't talking about any sort of cunning attack, simply the issue of having such functionality accessible to anyone who could visit /config/ and kn…

My understanding is that the config is available via localhost only. It most instances it does not need to be disabled. I think the hope is that it will be left enabled in production, not disabled.

You mean because it's on a different port that typically wouldn't be opened in the firewall to allow remote access?

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#219
post #39
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both, technically. CommonName has been deprecated for years, so all of Caddy's certificates (and all of Let's Encrypt's) are SAN certificates. Caddy manages single-SAN certs, in accordance with recommended best practices: https://docs.https.dev/acme-ops#use-one-name-per-certificate (We learned from experience that single SAN scales better and is less prone to troubles. For example, Caddy sites were not affected by th…

Ah, TIL. I was asking because right now my nginx/certbot setup requests a single certificate for all my domains, and I would like to have them separate. (I'm sure you can do that with certbot, I just haven't tweaked my setup, yet)

A certificate can be issued for as many, or as few domains as you'd like.

Look at certbot's -d parameter, this does not have anything to do with nginx, apache, caddy or any other web server.

Re: Show HN: Caddy 2

#220
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, TIL. I was asking because right now my nginx/certbot setup requests a single certificate for all my domains, and I would like to have them separate. (I'm sure you can do that with certbot, I just haven't tweaked my setup, yet)

A certificate can be issued for as many, or as few domains as you'd like. Look at certbot's -d parameter, this does not have anything to do with nginx, apache, caddy or any other web server.

Is that also possible when using --nginx? Or only in "vanilla" mode?
Post reply on HN