Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 7, 2024. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 7, 2024. It is now read-only.

Expand bit on port binding? #37

Description

@fluffy-critter

Instead of focusing on a mechanism (port binding), the focus should be on containerization, and the verbiage should also allow for things like UNIX-domain (file) sockets for the exposed connection. If anything, UNIX-domain sockets are superior to plain port binding because they're more secure on several axes:

  • Finer-grained access control, following the UNIX permissions model
  • No chance of a misconfiguration exposing the raw port to the outside world
  • Limits the attack surface for multiple users on a shared system

Additionally, in my own experience it makes things a lot easier to configure, since you don't have to run anything that keeps track of a service-port mapping, and it's way less likely to make mistakes with e.g. configuring multiple services on the same port or reverse proxying to the wrong one. You can also make better use of systemd to only launch the underlying service when the socket is needed by the fronting server, which can save on resources when managing several services which only run on rare occasion.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions