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This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 7, 2024.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

Expand bit on port binding? #37

Open
fluffy-critter opened this issue Feb 11, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Expand bit on port binding? #37

fluffy-critter opened this issue Feb 11, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@fluffy-critter
Copy link

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.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant