3 ms·

Irony, from the ngrok website: > DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION. Both the client and server are known to have serious reliability issues

Irony, from the ngrok website: > DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION. Both the client and server are known to have serious reliability issues including memory and file descriptor leaks as well as crashes Guess what? Turns out doing this is harder than it looks. So like... I get the point your were trying to make, but it’s actually harder than it looks, and Vizy hasn’t convinced me their service is secure. Don’t advertise your product as having every feature under the sun like, it’s so easy, we did everything! All it shows is you went features > quality in your product.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
kordlessagain 6y ago
> DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION I don't see that anywhere. Even if it is somewhere, it's not ironic. Ngrok is used for all sorts of stuff. Stream redirection to hosted services is a thing for ease of use to get going with play of a product. The point is that making it easy makes it public sometimes, which is fine if the use cases aren't arbitrary made up to justify a worrisome argument. It it very unlikely an agent is going to penetrate and exploit one of these cameras through such a service. Squirrels don't need to be secured. Other things do, so reconfigure! If you have a use case...a real one...then run this locally. The inventor and I are both privacy advocates. Your argument is cherry picked and overlooks the obvious on-premise use of a Raspberry Pi! :) In all seriousness, I get what you are talking about, but being adamant dog poop use cases must be secured is pointless. Seriously, if you have a secure use case for this it does NOT have to be streamed to some service. The service is there for squirrels, not secure deployments.
- wokwokwok 6y ago
  > The point is that making it easy makes it public sometimes which is fine... > The inventor and I are both privacy advocates. ... Well, you've certainly sold me on avoiding your product with that.
- avhon1 6y ago
  > > DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION > I don't see that anywhere. I didn't find it on the website, but I did find it on the GitHub: https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

kordlessagain 6y ago

> DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION I don't see that anywhere. Even if it is somewhere, it's not ironic. Ngrok is used for all sorts of stuff. Stream redirection to hosted services is a thing for ease of use to get going with play of a product. The point is that making it easy makes it public sometimes, which is fine if the use cases aren't arbitrary made up to justify a worrisome argument. It it very unlikely an agent is going to penetrate and exploit one of these cameras through such a service. Squirrels don't need to be secured. Other things do, so reconfigure! If you have a use case...a real one...then run this locally. The inventor and I are both privacy advocates. Your argument is cherry picked and overlooks the obvious on-premise use of a Raspberry Pi! :) In all seriousness, I get what you are talking about, but being adamant dog poop use cases must be secured is pointless. Seriously, if you have a secure use case for this it does NOT have to be streamed to some service. The service is there for squirrels, not secure deployments.

wokwokwok 6y ago
> The point is that making it easy makes it public sometimes which is fine... > The inventor and I are both privacy advocates. ... Well, you've certainly sold me on avoiding your product with that.
avhon1 6y ago
> > DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION > I don't see that anywhere. I didn't find it on the website, but I did find it on the GitHub: https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok