←back to thread

Knocker, a knock based access control system for your homelab

(github.com)
67 points xlmnxp | 3 comments | 22 Oct 25 08:37 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
myzek ◴[22 Oct 25 09:31 UTC] No.45666685[source]▶
I don't want to be a hater, but exposing access to your homelab through a "fully vibe coded" application (it's mentioned at the bottom of the README) is probably not a good idea.

The idea itself sounds fun though

replies(7): >>45666794 #>>45666805 #>>45667638 #>>45668320 #>>45672456 #>>45673770 #>>45676658 #
1. sanex ◴[22 Oct 25 12:52 UTC] No.45668320[source]▶
It's open source. Audit it like you would any other service that exposed your homelab to the Internet. How do you know XYZ repo isn't coded for some bootcampers capstone project? I bet those are even less secure.

Edit: should have mentioned I am a bootcamp grad, not just throwing random shade.

replies(2): >>45668415 #>>45669044 #
2. QuantumNomad_ ◴[22 Oct 25 13:00 UTC] No.45668415[source]▶
> How do you know XYZ repo isn't coded for some bootcampers capstone project?

I gate access to my homelab using Wireguard.

Wireguard is widely deployed across the world, and has been worked on for years.

No random new repo that was vibe coded can measure up in the slightest to that.

3. OrderlyTiamat ◴[22 Oct 25 13:42 UTC] No.45669044[source]▶
If I had to audit security services for exposing homelab to the internet, I wouldn't use those services in the first place. I'm fine trying things out, but this is a very important security boundary, and it's a solved problem. Why risk it with an auditor who does it for a hobby (me)?