this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
747 points (96.6% liked)
Selfhosted
60426 readers
248 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Have you even read the issues and understood them?
Yes, those should be fixed, but unless you are worried about someone hijacking a video stream when you use a generic media path, there is not that much to worry about.
All (raw) image endpoints in ImageByNameController, ImageController & RemoteImageController are unauthenticated
As I said, when you know the exact path of a media item on the server then you can check if the item exists.
If you choose a none standard filepath its not an issue.
Should that be fixed yes.
Whats the scenario? A law firm could brute force check all media items on open jellyfin servers? Highly illegal to exploit something like this in a lot of jurisdiction. And would also not proof the existence of the media on the server, just a file named like it.
Mitigation? Just add another random letter in the docker-compose mount path.