It is not clear that this is the app that will be used for the new watches. I imagine it will support the new RePebble watches, but I believe that app was intended for the original Pebble watches.

The thing that makes it so unclear to me is that this is a repo owned by the Rebble team, not the RePebble team. I do not know how much overlap there is between the two teams, but the RePebble team does not have any open source repos that I could find. Any mention of open source software by RePebble (including the OS) are links to repos owned by other teams, which is a little concerning.

I understand that the watch operating system is open source. However, it seems that the watch will connect to a companion smartphone app. Do you know if the app is a requirement and/or if the app will be open source?

If you know your VPN’s DNS server, you can change your local DNS so that it redirects your specified domains/subdomains to the appropriate, local IP address and all other requests would then use your VPN’s DNS.

If you don’t know your VPN provider’s DNS server information, you may be able to still do something similar to the above depending on your setup. Otherwise, you could run your own DNS resolver or use a different DNS provider. I guess doing so could potentially be used to further fingerprint you, but the concern about “DNS fingerprinting” is moreso DNS leaks where your DNS queries are accessible to unintended parties due to improper configuration.

I believe the only other option would be to change your hosts file on each device you want to use to connect to your services, which is probably not the best approach and may be challenging/impossible for certain devices.

Also, unless you setup the self signed certs to be trusted on a network/domain level (or again on each individual device), you will likely get a warning/error about the self signed certs when accessing your services. You may need to work through this process each time the certs renew.

I recommend buying a domain if you do not already have one and finding a service that provides wildcard certification challenges. This would allow you to setup a valid, trusted certificate that you could reuse for all of your services. The only thing that you would need to provide is an email address (can be any email address) and your domain name (in addition to other information that may be required to setup an account at the cert provider, but you may already have an account there as it could be the domain name registrar or other services like VPS providers, Cloudflare, etc.). Since it is a wildcard cert, each subdomain does not need to be set publicly and if you only use the domain within your network, the domain does not need to be publicly associated with any IP address.

If you do go forward with that approach, you could use the wildcard cert directly within NginxProxyManager or other reverse proxies. They will also automatically update/maintain the cert for you.

Yes, I am using PersistentVolumes. I have played around with different tools that have backup/snapshot abilities, but I haven’t seen a way to integrate that functionality with a CD tool. I’m sure if I spent enough time working through things, I may be able to put together something that allows the CD tool to take a snapshot. However, I think that having it handle rollbacks would be a bit too much for me to handle without assistance.

Thanks for the reply! I am currently looking to do this for a Kubernetes cluster running various services to more reliably (and frequently) perform upgrades with automated rollbacks when necessary. At some point in the future, it may include services I am developing, but at the moment that is not the intended use case.

I am not currently familiar enough with the CI/CD pipeline (currently Renovatebot and ArgoCD) to reliably accomplish automated rollbacks, but I believe I can get everything working with the exception of rolling back a data backup (especially for upgrades that contain backwards incompatible database changes). In terms of storage, I am open to using various selfhosted services/platforms even if it means drastically changing the setup (eg - moving from TrueNAS to Longhorn, moving from Ceph to Proxmox, etc.) if it means I can accomplish this without a noticeable performance degradation to any of the services.

I understand that it can be challenging (or maybe impossible) to reliably generate backups while the services are running. I also understand that the best way to do this for databases would be to stop the service and perform a database dump. However, I’m not too concerned with losing <10 seconds of data (or however long the backup jobs take) if the backups can be performed in a way that does not result in corrupted data. Realistically, the most common use cases for the rollbacks would be invalid Kubernetes resources/application configuration as a result of the upgrade or the removal/change of a feature that I depend on.

Raspberry Pi + PiHole + PiVPN = Network Gateway Drug

Although, PiVPN is winding down so you might want to find something different instead. Setting up a regular Wireguard VPN isn’t so bad, but it may be simpler to setup a Tailscale Tailnet.

I think that @theomegabit@infosec.exchange is asking for Proton to become an OAuth/OIDC provider. This would allow you to sign into any service, app, platform, etc. that supports it using your Proton account. Some common providers that are widely supported are Google, Apple, Github, Facebook, and Microsoft.

It is generally considered more secure than using “regular credentials” like username/email and password when using several services. There are a few downsides to this though. One of those downsides is that your OAuth/OIDC provider will have record of all your accounts used through OAuth/OIDC. For example, @theomegabit@infosec.exchange would like to avoid Google knowing about the various services used.

https://changedetection.io/

Change Detection can be used for several use cases. One of them is monitoring price changes.

Some additional ideas for the Protectli device:

• backup/redundant OPNsense instance for high availability
• backup NAS/storage
  • set it up at a family/friend’s house
• a test/QA device for new services or architecture changes
• travel router/firewall
• home theater PC
• Proxmox/virtualization host
  • Kubernetes cluster
• Tor, I2P, cryptocurrency, etc. node
• Home Assistant
  • dedicated local STT/TTS/conversation agent
• NVR
• low powered desktop PC

There are so many options. It really depends on what you want, your other devices, the Protectli’s specs, your budget, etc.

tl;dr: A notable marketshare of multiple browser components and browsers must exist in order to properly ensure/maintain truly open web standards.

It is important that Firefox and its components like Gecko and Spidermonkey to exist as well as maintain a notable marketshare. Likewise, it is important for WebKit and its components to exist and maintain a notable marketshare. The same is true for any other browser/rendering/JavaScript engines.

While it is great that we have so many non-Google Chrome alternatives like Chromium, Edge, Vivaldi, etc., they all use the same or very similar engines. This means that they all display and interact with websites nearly identically.

When Google decides certain implementation/interpretation of web standards, formats, behavior, etc. should be included in Google Chrome (and consequently all Chromium based browsers), then the majority marketshare of web browsers will behave that way. If the Chrome/Chromium based browsers reaches a nearly unanimous browser marketshare, then Google can either ignore any/all open web standards, force their will in deciding/implementing new open web standards, or even become the defacto open web standard.

When any one entity has that much control over the open web standards, then the web standards are no longer truly “open” and in this case becomes “Google’s web standards”. In some (or maybe even many) cases, this may be fine. However, we saw with Internet Explorer in the past this is not something that the market should allow. We are seeing evidence that we shouldn’t allow Google to have this much influence with things like the adoption of JPEG XL or implementation of FLoC.

With three or more browser engines, rendering engines, and browsers with notable marketshares, web developers are forced to develop in adherence to the accepted open web standards. With enough marketshare spread across those engines/browsers, the various engines/browsers are incentivized to maintain compatibility with open web standards. As long as the open web standards are designed and maintained without overt influence by a single or few entities and the open standards are actively used, then the best interest of the collective of all internet users is best served.

Otherwise, the best interest of a few entities (in this case Google) is best served.