[HN Gopher] Localtunnel - Easily share a web service on your loc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Localtunnel - Easily share a web service on your local development
       machine
        
       Author : edward
       Score  : 55 points
       Date   : 2023-09-29 19:21 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (theboroer.github.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (theboroer.github.io)
        
       | mkl95 wrote:
       | Localtunnel used to be a nice tunnel. It has gone through some
       | enshittification lately.
       | 
       | > tunnel consent page now requires the tunnel creator's public IP
       | in order to access tunnel content
       | 
       | https://github.com/localtunnel/localtunnel/issues/598
       | 
       | There are free non kafkaesque competitors out there.
        
         | LoganDark wrote:
         | > enshittification
         | 
         | That is not enshittification by any means. Enshittification is
         | screwing your users over for profit or something. That was an
         | honest attempt to curb the amount of abuse reports and threats
         | that the maintainer was receiving.
        
         | mmcclure wrote:
         | I think it's pretty hard to read this as anything other than a
         | maintainer trying to stop malicious actors from abusing their
         | project. You might not agree with how they're doing it, but
         | calling this enshittification and kafkaesque feels pretty
         | hyperbolic. Posting the comment here just in case folks don't
         | click through:                   Hey everyone,         It
         | saddens me to be forced to add yet another annoying thing to
         | the public localtunnel server but...              As of 2
         | minutes ago, all tunnels now require a real user to enter the
         | endpoint IP address (which acts like your tunnel link's
         | password) on the consent page.          Showing and having the
         | users click a continue button in order to access the tunnel
         | content didn't really do too much to fight of people hosting
         | phishing portals via localtunnel. I've also been getting an
         | enormous amount of phishing/abuse notices from various
         | organizations worldwide, forwarded notices from my hosting
         | provider, and even have been put on notice that I will be
         | responsible for costs related to removing IPs from various IP
         | blacklists...              I'm currently building an abuse
         | reporting tool for these orgs to use that'll automate banning
         | users hosting phishing portals but until that's built & tested
         | this new password-protection way of abuse fighting will have to
         | do.              Sorry for any inconvenience...
         | PS. If localtunnel doesn't work for your use case for whatever
         | reason, feel free to checkout other alternatives like
         | https://ngrok.io              If anyone has any other
         | suggestions on easy ways to fight phishing/malware portals from
         | using this service, i'm all ears!
        
         | yodon wrote:
         | > enshittification
         | 
         | And yet the link you shared explains precisely why it is we
         | can't have nice things
        
         | dewey wrote:
         | What a weird complaint, all I can see there is that we can't
         | have nice things because as soon as you put something online
         | (image hoster, tunnel hosting,...) bad actors are going to
         | abuse it and ruin it for everyone.
        
       | tpmx wrote:
       | I think it's sensible to use Cloudflare Tunnel for this purpose
       | if you care about security and still need it to be free. It's run
       | by a $21B company that has a lot to lose if they get caught doing
       | anything bad with your data.
       | 
       | https://blog.cloudflare.com/tunnel-for-everyone/
       | 
       | They have being doing this for 2+ years as a marketing exercise,
       | afaik.
       | 
       | Downside: Their documentation honestly isn't the easiest to go
       | through if all you want to do is to setup something ngrok-like.
        
         | RockRobotRock wrote:
         | I have been really digging Cloudflare tunnel. For my self
         | hosted apps, I used to expose everything through a reverse
         | nginx proxy listening on 80 and 443, but this is much more
         | convenient. Their Zero Trust stuff is cool too, although not
         | something I'm looking to pay for.
        
         | kybernetikos wrote:
         | > run by a company that has a lot to lose if they are caught
         | doing anything bad.
         | 
         | More and more these days I'm finding myself shut off from
         | websites, and seeing the cloudflare page telling me that
         | they've decided that I'm not allowed to visit them. The page
         | gives me no way to argue that they've got it wrong, it suggests
         | that I contact the site if I think that cloudflare have blocked
         | me from it incorrectly, but that's pretty hard considering that
         | they've just blocked me from it. It's not minor sites either,
         | yesterday trying to access discord.com got me the cloudflare
         | page from my desktop. Apparently my mobile internet connection
         | isn't good enough for cloudflare either, since an enormous
         | number of sites trigger the page on that.
         | 
         | Cloudflare are one of the most disturbing things about the
         | modern internet.
        
           | RockRobotRock wrote:
           | Just for the record using Cloudflare Tunnel doesn't mean you
           | are using their WAF products (blocking) AFAIK
        
           | tpmx wrote:
           | ...caught doing anything bad [with your data] is so obviously
           | what I meant. But hey, technically you found a hook!
           | 
           | You probably have a good point about Cloudflare's effect on
           | open web access on the internet, but.. that's not really what
           | we are talking about here, is it?
        
             | kybernetikos wrote:
             | > but.. that's not really what we are talking about here,
             | is it?
             | 
             | I suppose I better make the link that I saw more clear. A
             | lot of people use cloudflare services because they are
             | free. I've done it myself. And in many case that would be
             | fine. Cloudflare are in a unique position - partly through
             | the reach those free services have given them, they now
             | have an unusual level of power over the internet. Using
             | cloudflare services gives them more power. I think before
             | anyone uses a free cloudflare service, they should
             | absolutely think about whether they're going to use that
             | power wisely.
             | 
             | This is particularly the case when there are good, free
             | open source alternatives such as the service posted here,
             | that you used as a jumping off point to talk about the
             | cloudflare service.
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | I see an open source client connecting to a service run
               | by a private person with no full name disclosed. The
               | source code of the service is published as open source,
               | but that is not necessarily exactly what is running.
               | 
               | If this can be shown to be incorrect I'm happy to correct
               | this post.
        
               | kybernetikos wrote:
               | https://github.com/localtunnel/server MIT license
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | Updated.
        
       | Scarbutt wrote:
       | What name registrars allow one to to create unlimited subdomains
       | on the fly like how Localtunnel does it?
        
         | thewataccount wrote:
         | It's not the name registrar it's the dns server.
         | 
         | You just use a wildcard dns record, and then the webserver uses
         | the host header to determine which subdomain was used (for
         | webservers at least).
        
         | jmholla wrote:
         | A registrar generally isn't involved in creating subdomains.
         | You buy the domain and define subdomains on your DNS server.
         | 
         | Your registrar may also provide DNS services and that's where
         | such a limitation would come into play.
        
       | iJohnDoe wrote:
       | So glad to see the server component can also be self-hosted.
       | Nicely done!
        
         | jefc1111 wrote:
         | Have been self hosting the server component for a few years to
         | support some local dev workflows.Can confirm great satisfaction
         | :)
        
       | vorticalbox wrote:
       | How does this compare to ngrok?
        
         | astrodust wrote:
         | Ngrok seems like an actual company, while this is...do we even
         | know who/what runs this service?
        
           | LoganDark wrote:
           | Ngrok wasn't always an actual company, I miss the days when
           | their service was affordable.
        
             | astrodust wrote:
             | It's certainly gone more "Enterprise", but it also paved
             | the way for many other similar services to take hold.
        
               | LoganDark wrote:
               | Well, enterprises suck. It's all "contact us for this,
               | contact us for that", low limits unless you pay large
               | sums. Really not very attractive anymore. I miss the days
               | when I could expose Minecraft servers for free. The
               | cheapest plan of $10/mo is more than double what I pay
               | for Firefox Relay & reMarkable Cloud combined.
               | 
               | edit: nevermind, they've actually raised the cheapest
               | plan to $15/mo! But they used to offer TCP addresses for
               | free, and now they don't allow them at all unless you pay
               | $15/mo for them.
               | 
               | Anyway playit.gg exists.
        
       | febeling wrote:
       | Is this materially different from the alternatives?
       | 
       | https://github.com/anderspitman/awesome-tunneling
        
       | jeron wrote:
       | Expose Yourself to the World has to be one of the funniest
       | taglines
        
         | dang wrote:
         | It's great but too baity for HN so I put a phrase from the
         | first sentence up there instead.
        
           | jefc1111 wrote:
           | I remember when I first read the tagline and thought it was a
           | bit cheap, but later realised it's actually quite am accurate
           | and appropriate description of the functionality.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | I agree, but the long tail will not be able to resist
             | getting triggered.
        
       | marcodiego wrote:
       | I've grown using dial up internet in the 90's. At the time, once
       | you "connected" you got a real IP you could share with anyone in
       | the world. Run a service in your machine in your desk, pass your
       | IP to a friend and that was all you needed. Of course, there were
       | security implications and IP are a scarce resource now, but I
       | liked the way it was then.
       | 
       | IPv6, AFAIR, was promised to solve the scarcity of IP's. Every
       | grain of sand could have a world reachable IP they promised us.
       | What we got were CGNAT, hole punching, rendez-vous servers... If
       | you want serve something "at home" these you'll have pay extra
       | money for a "real IP" depending on your ISP.
       | 
       | The current situation is bad and, considering interests of
       | biggest companies that can I influence it these days, not
       | improving anytime soon.
       | 
       | I really miss the freedom I had in the 90's when I could run IRC
       | server on my machine and tell my friends to connect (I actually
       | did that!), when I could code a quick game and pass to my friends
       | to play on-line. I see people buying security cameras and on-line
       | switches, but what they are actually using are services which can
       | be disabled or become paid as soon as it becomes profitable for
       | the vendor.
       | 
       | We need to be independent. We should be able run services on our
       | machines and pass that to world without any special permission if
       | we want. The possibility of running services should not be a
       | hostage of a few billion dollar companies or deep pockets.
       | 
       | The best solution I know so far for this problem is the TOR
       | network, but it needs special software on both ends and some
       | knowledge to use. It is time for us to start thinking about
       | having the internet on our hands again.
        
         | codazoda wrote:
         | It's totally possible for many of us. I simply own a domain at
         | Namecheap and hit their dynamic IP update endpoint to set the
         | dns to point to my currently assigned IP. Mine only changes
         | with router resets and such. I also forward some ports from my
         | router to my machine's IP and set my machine to always get the
         | same internal IP.
         | 
         | I serve several websites from my home office on a little
         | Raspberry Pi 400.
         | 
         | Read more about the Raspberry Pi in my Bedroom at the URL
         | below:
         | 
         | https://joeldare.com/private-analtyics-and-my-raspberry-pi-4...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-29 23:01 UTC)