4 ms·

It is a bad idea to use a full-blown Node.js web server to serve some static content. A better solution would be to build the app in one container and then buil

It is a bad idea to use a full-blown Node.js web server to serve some static content. A better solution would be to build the app in one container and then build another Nginx container to serve it. This container can then be hardened (run as non-root, use a read-only filesystem). An added benefit is that Nginx uses fewer system resources (~10 megabytes of RAM will work just fine). We’re running such a setup in production; a sample Dockerfile can be found on https://github.com/WISVCH/docker-nginx https://github.com/WISVCH/docker-nginx.

toomim 8y ago
I know that nginx is more traditionally known for hosting static content than node.js, but are there any particular reasons why it's bad to just use node for static content these days?
- nunjee 8y ago
  It happened to me to have memory leaks and eventually OOM errors using Node.js as static files server. Switched then to Nginx...
- emilsedgh 8y ago
  Generally nginx is written in C which simply performs better than garbage collected, dynamically typed javascript. But regarding sending static files, nginx uses Linux' sendFile[0] which outperforms anything in user-space. Up until a few years ago this wasn't something Node could use. I'm not sure if still that's the case though. My information could be badly outdated. [0] http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sendfile.2.html http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sendfile.2.html
- praseodym 8y ago
  From a security standpoint, the attack surface of Node.js and whatever libraries are used to make `npm start` happen is a lot larger than plain Nginx. From a general usability standpoint, a Node.js container with all build dependencies will surely turn into a bloated several hundred megabyte Docker image — an Nginx image with just the built static files is a lot smaller.
  - shishy 8y ago
    I understand you're comparing NodeJS vs Nginx there, but for my curiosity, if someone is building an API, how do you think NodeJS would compare to Ruby on Rails or Python/Django from a security standpoint?
    - praseodym 8y ago
      I don’t think either language is fundamentally more secure than the other. That being said, the Node.js ecosystem feels more immature than Python’s. The common practice of using microdependencies means that an average project has countless dependencies with varying levels of support — it’s all but impossible to make sure every one of those dependencies is properly maintained. The framework/library churn rate seems to have decreased though, so that’s certainly good from a security standpoint as well.
lowpro 8y ago
Definitely agree! This project was put together in order to learn more about the technology itself, and much of this wouldn't be useful in production. For example our versioning was broken and we didn't figure out why, but that wouldn't be tenable either. We concluded for smaller projects Docker may be more trouble than it's worth, at least from a little experimenting with it. Thanks for the link!

toomim 8y ago

I know that nginx is more traditionally known for hosting static content than node.js, but are there any particular reasons why it's bad to just use node for static content these days?

nunjee 8y ago
It happened to me to have memory leaks and eventually OOM errors using Node.js as static files server. Switched then to Nginx...
emilsedgh 8y ago
Generally nginx is written in C which simply performs better than garbage collected, dynamically typed javascript. But regarding sending static files, nginx uses Linux' sendFile[0] which outperforms anything in user-space. Up until a few years ago this wasn't something Node could use. I'm not sure if still that's the case though. My information could be badly outdated. [0] http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sendfile.2.html http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sendfile.2.html
praseodym 8y ago
From a security standpoint, the attack surface of Node.js and whatever libraries are used to make `npm start` happen is a lot larger than plain Nginx. From a general usability standpoint, a Node.js container with all build dependencies will surely turn into a bloated several hundred megabyte Docker image — an Nginx image with just the built static files is a lot smaller.
- shishy 8y ago
  I understand you're comparing NodeJS vs Nginx there, but for my curiosity, if someone is building an API, how do you think NodeJS would compare to Ruby on Rails or Python/Django from a security standpoint?
  - praseodym 8y ago
    I don’t think either language is fundamentally more secure than the other. That being said, the Node.js ecosystem feels more immature than Python’s. The common practice of using microdependencies means that an average project has countless dependencies with varying levels of support — it’s all but impossible to make sure every one of those dependencies is properly maintained. The framework/library churn rate seems to have decreased though, so that’s certainly good from a security standpoint as well.

lowpro 8y ago

Definitely agree! This project was put together in order to learn more about the technology itself, and much of this wouldn't be useful in production. For example our versioning was broken and we didn't figure out why, but that wouldn't be tenable either. We concluded for smaller projects Docker may be more trouble than it's worth, at least from a little experimenting with it. Thanks for the link!