Hi everyone, we’ve been working on Safebox, an open-source framework that helps you install, manage, and access self-hosted applications such as Home Assistant, Nextcloud, and Jellyfin ect. Safebox runs on Linux, macOS, and Windows (supporting both x86 and ARM64 architectures, even Raspberry Pi, Banana Pi hardwares also tested). It manages domain and subdomain setup, Let’s Encrypt certificates, DNS configuration, and reverse proxy (nginx). It also includes a WireGuard-based remote access feature and a geo-redundant backup system (currently in development). The project is in beta, and we’re looking for people interested in testing and sharing feedback. All information about Safebox and beta testing can be found in our Discord channel. Try it using Docker: docker run --rm -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock safebox/framework-scheduler
Then open: http://localhost:8080/
Links: Website: https://safebox.network/ GitHub: https://github.com/safeboxnetwork/framework-scheduler Discord: https://discord.gg/aBP8bz6N8J
We’d really appreciate any feedback or ideas for improvement.
Alright so I’ll ask a hardball question or two. What precisely are you offering that isn’t just repackaged install scripts and a wireguard wrapper?
What is your / your teams background in software security? The implication of the name and your “branding” are selling a lot - what outside of docker and wireguard are you bringing to the table. On that note: why docker?
Further - you are paywalling remote access… When your platform is utilizing wireguard.
Netbird (one of many examples) doesn’t even do that… What’s the reasoning?
I have more but let’s start there.
Our software is basically a web app that makes it easier to install and manage supported third-party apps. Wireguard (currently) is only used for remote access, if you don’t need that you don’t have to turn it on.
For security, everything runs in an isolated sandbox using docker and that also answers your other question.
We do plan to offer a paid remote access service in the future, but it’s totally optional. The same goes for backups, they can be geo-redundant if you use our service, but these are optional feature.
Our software is basically a web app that makes it easier to install and manage supported third-party apps. Wireguard (currently) is only used for remote access, if you don’t need that you don’t have to turn it on.
So my point I was driving at - especially with such a diverse offering of wireguard services which do not charge for (effectively) VPN access to your own infrastructure - I was more interested in why your service would be looking to pay gate it as a “premium” feature.
This would be different if we were talking you hosting all these services on your infrastructure but considering the marketing to homelab - I find it to be an unusual choice… And was curious as to the reason for the decision.
For security, everything runs in an isolated sandbox using docker and that also answers your other question.
Right. Docker does sandboxing. That’s a core feature it provides - I’m just trying to ascertain what precisely your company is actually offering outside of a ui wrapper on these established services.
I mentioned earlier that your branding seems to emphasize security - but all I’m seeing is mention of existing security features inherent in the software being wrapped. Does your team do additional tuning for security? Do they have experience in infrastructure security, hardening systems, or the like? To be clear I just want to better understand the branding and what is being offered.
the same goes for backups, they can be geo-redundant if you use our service, but these are optional feature.
Alright so this is a feature that a homelab user can actually use - backups. Could you expand on how you will be managing this feature / plan to implement it once it is offered?
This is an ad disguised as a helpful post
Hmm, you might be right, it looks like there are plans for a premium subscription service with pay walled features after the beta is over.
Hard pass.
I won’t delve into the debate of open-source and financing, and I don’t necessarily throw the stone when I hear subscriptions is the plan, so for your sake I just ask:
Who are you people, and is your long term business plan as open as the software?
Go look at the code in github. It’s one person, and it’s just bash scripts.
We’re just a family working together in our spare time. We want to make self-hosted web hosting easier to start and easier to use for everyone. We don’t have a business plan yet, we just want to build something useful and see what people think of it. Are you assuming it’s not open source because of the github page? We used Gitea before, and we’re moving everything over from there, that’s why it may look a bit empty right now.
Thank you for answering. No there was no underlying assumption on the open source.
In which way does it differ from Yunohost?
They will have a paid tier after beta, also it’s deployed with docker only. It’s a shame, it does look quite clean.
Yep, two reasons I’m out.
€10 a month even though you’re hosting things yourself on your own hardware.
To be fair, the pro plan is for the non-local stuff, which is at least understandable as domains and resolution services are non-free.
Also ongoing development takes resources. Seems like a reasonable approach.
I say this as someone who absolutely despises subscriptions.
They should clarify it. If these 3 points are just offering an easier way to do it, then fine. If they block these features in general when you want to manage it yourself, then screw it. I had one self hosted software, which blocked remote access even when you use your own reverse proxy. At least it was a one time payment.
Since the software is open source, we’re not planning to block or restrict anything now or in the future. Right now we’re focused on development, and later we might build some services around it, but the software itself will always be free to use.
Thanks for the suggestion, we’ll definitely look into it.
