3 ms·
There's nothing "explicit" about this sort of misconfiguration, that's exactly why it catches so many people out. It's a bad/insecure default that serves no pra
by dns_snek 4y ago
There's nothing "explicit" about this sort of misconfiguration, that's exactly why it catches so many people out. It's a bad/insecure default that serves no practical purpose. If Docker bound to 127.0.0.1 by default and required you to explicitly bind to "0.0.0.0" to expose the container to the outside world, the frequency of dangerous misconfigurations would likely be reduced by 95%+.
It would still catch people who bind to 0.0.0.0 and expect the traffic to be blocked by UFW, but that's a different issue. `iptables: false` is a very crude solution, they should offer something like `iptables: "manual"` where Docker only touches its own iptables chains and lets you wire them up to your own UFW/iptables chains in a sane way.