Is it normal to have this many unRAID upgrades?

[KarylFStein]

Originally Posted by EnterNoEscape

There are devices that do everything through the Internet. Those would be good candidates for isolation.

I make them good candidates for not buying . Granted, I did make an exception for the Echo.

I'm still tinkering with HA-type stuff, so haven't thought too much about how it'll look if/when I decide to invest more heavily. But, I'm avoiding things that require the Internet to work, or some external third-party portal to access. I think I could get away with an HA VLAN by attaching the controller to both VLANs, but not to the point where I've thought out if it's worth it to do that.

[EnterNoEscape]

Originally Posted by KarylFStein

I make them good candidates for not buying . Granted, I did make an exception for the Echo.

I'm still tinkering with HA-type stuff, so haven't thought too much about how it'll look if/when I decide to invest more heavily. But, I'm avoiding things that require the Internet to work, or some external third-party portal to access. I think I could get away with an HA VLAN by attaching the controller to both VLANs, but not to the point where I've thought out if it's worth it to do that.

I 100% agree with you. The Echo is what I was thinking about when I said that. I have many IP accessible devices, but the Echo is the only one that requires the Internet to function. Also, I didn't buy it, my wife bought it for me for Christmas. I was still on the fence about getting one at the time, but I have one now, so there's that.

[KarylFStein]

Originally Posted by EnterNoEscape

I 100% agree with you. The Echo is what I was thinking about when I said that. I have many IP accessible devices, but the Echo is the only one that requires the Internet to function. Also, I didn't buy it, my wife bought it for me for Christmas. I was still on the fence about getting one at the time, but I have one now, so there's that.

That's funny, I got mine for Christmas too. You sort of have to hook it up, right .

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by wayner

In many/most/all instances don't you want to be able to talk to those IoT devices from devices on your LAN?

Off the top of my head I have the following IoT devices: IP cams, irrigation controller, garage door controller, LED light strip controller, Hue lighting controller.

In every instance I will want to access these devices via a web UI from PCs on my LAN or via mobile devices like my iPhones/iPads. Plus many of these devices integrate with my HA controller, so they at least have to be able to talk to it.

Well, I don't really have much (yet), the device that comes to mind is my Davis WeatherLink IP, which only needs to connect to the internet.

I haven't really jumped into the IoT/HA thing yet, partially for security reasons. I really don't like how so many of them need to be connected to the internet for no particularly good reason. But anyway, that's OT.

[KarylFStein]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Well, I don't really have much (yet), the device that comes to mind is my Davis WeatherLink IP, which only needs to connect to the internet.

I haven't really jumped into the IoT/HA thing yet, partially for security reasons. I really don't like how so many of them need to be connected to the internet for no particularly good reason. But anyway, that's OT.

I think most of this thread is OT, (off topic), lol.

For being OT, (on topic), I am too surprised at the number of updates, but am new to the unRAID release cycle. To me that says someone is listening to concerns. I'm starting to warm up to this thing (like the Echo) even if it's a security disaster. I will say again that nothing should be chmod 777 or 666 period except for things like /dev/null.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by KarylFStein

I think most of this thread is OT, (off topic), lol.

For being OT, (on topic), I am too surprised at the number of updates, but am new to the unRAID release cycle. To me that says someone is listening to concerns. I'm starting to warm up to this thing (like the Echo) even if it's a security disaster. I will say again that nothing should be chmod 777 or 666 period except for things like /dev/null.

Does the Docker run SageTV as root as well?

The 777 stuff is cringe worthy on its own, but having the application running as Root by default on the standard Linux install is terrifying in other ways.

"ps aux | grep sage"

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by Monedeath

Does the Docker run SageTV as root as well?

The 777 stuff is cringe worthy on its own, but having the application running as Root by default on the standard Linux install is terrifying in other ways.

"ps aux | grep sage"

Docker runs sagetv as user "nobody" (the user is specified in the docker template file). The only 777 stuff that I'm aware of is the recording directory.