Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Of course, I don’t want anyone diving in completely blind, some basic knowledge, research, and interest are definitely needed. But if someone decides they really want to keep their data safe and under their own control, even something like family photos, they should be able to get started in a simpler way. Then, once the first step doesn’t seem too intimidating, they can deepen their technical skills. The goal of Safebox isn’t to replace that knowledge, just to make self hosting more accessible.

@[email protected] I absolutely love your comments! You’ve chimed in on several of my posts already, and you always share such interesting stories and enthusiasm. I really hope it stays that way, keep being as passionate and helpful as you are, the self hosting community could use more people like you

We created Safebox mainly to make self-hosting easier, and proper, complete documentation is definitely something we want to provide, it’s already in the works. We also thought a lot of people might learn from it, but the scope is huge, so we’re still figuring out the right balance.

Should we cover the basic concepts too? How deep should we go? Introducing the software itself is the easy part, explaining all the related concepts in a clear, non-technical way is the real challenge.

Our goal isn’t to turn Safebox into a full-on cybersecurity course, but we do want users to understand what’s happening and why certain features matter, so they don’t feel lost.

As for the sources you mentioned, I have to admit I’m not entirely sure either. During my university studies I only touched on cybersecurity partially, mostly around the risks users face and how they respond. Yes, there definitely needs to be some basic guidance on security, what the main risks are and how to keep yourself safe. Honestly, I think this could work even better as a community project, where different people can contribute their own approaches and share experiences on how they protect their setups and what has worked for them.

Thanks your detailed feedback, I’ll try to go through all your points.

When we said Docker, we meant the desktop version, basically so anyone can try Safebox on their own desktop and check out the early product. We also added an auto docker install for server setups a few days ago.

You’re right about the docs, they’re still in the works, and proper documentation will be released soon.

That other post you mentioned got a bit too heated, so the mods took it down. Definitely wasn’t our intention to stir up tension, and it wasn’t about not liking the answer or linking it to the product. Right now we’re mainly looking for early feedback and for people curious enough to help test things out.

Thanks for explaining your point of view and your suggestions. It means a lot for us in this early state, and looking forward of any future feedback of your about the actual product.

Thanks again for your suggestion we recently added docker autoinstall. Currently supporting ubuntu, debian and raspbian. https://github.com/safeboxnetwork/framework-scheduler/blob/main/README.md Thanks, and feel free to share any further feedback or remark.

Since a few of you mentioned the Docker installer, we added it. https://github.com/safeboxnetwork/framework-scheduler/blob/main/README.md It currently supports ubuntu, debian and raspbian. Thanks, and don’t hesitate to reach out if you run into any issues.

Thanks for pointing that out, we actually went back and rechecked the whole auto docker install idea because of comments like yours. And yeah, you’re right, most people running this on a real server are using Debian anyway, so having an automatic install there does make sense.

The reason the current guide shows docker desktop on macOS is just because we’re still in beta, and we assumed beginners would try Safebox on a regular desktop first. But we get that it’s not the best example for server software, and we’ll improve that.

We’ve brought back the auto-install script and tested it on Debian/ubuntu/raspbian. If you want to try it out and tell us if anything breaks, here it is: https://github.com/safeboxnetwork/framework-scheduler/blob/main/README.md

The main difference is that Safebox is software that runs on any os with a single command using docker. There’s no need to use the terminal or run commands afterward. Like Yunohost, it lets you install and manage self-hosted apps, but it also includes geo-redundant backups and remote access, all from one interface.

Thanks😀 As I mentioned in a previous comment, we tried to integrate auto docker installation, but ultimately decided that it would be easier for users to install Docker themselves, and the guide explains the installation process step by step. This way, Safebox can be installed on any os.

Thanks, we’ll consider it and see if we can make some changes to the design.

Thanks 😀 Safebox doesn’t automatically install Docker, but installing Docker is easy and we’ve got detailed instructions in our installation guide on the website. All you need is a working os, then you can follow the guide to set up docker before launching Safebox.

Thanks for the comment! In older Safebox versions we tried a Docker install script for Debian, but it felt too rigid. Since Safebox is meant to run on pretty much any os, we figured it’s easier for people to just install docker themselves. It’s really simple, and we even cover it in the Safebox install guide.

Also, unlike CasaOS, YunoHost, or Cloudron, which only run on certain OSes, Safebox works on any os as long as Docker is installed, making it much more flexible. That’s basically the “price” we pay for supporting any os.

Thanks😀Glad it looks useful. That’s exactly what we had in mind, making things like reverse proxy and app setup way easier.

Thanks for your feedback 😀 Yeah, the app list on the website can be a bit confusing since it moves around, we’ll fix that soon. For now, these are the apps you can use in Safebox: Jellyfin, HomeAssistant, Immich, Nextcloud, Guacamole, Leantime, Gitea, Vaultwarden, Transmission, SMTP, Outline, Filebrowser, PocketID We’re always working on adding more apps and improving existing features, so the list will keep growing over time.

Yeah, it’s similar to Yunohost or Sandstorm in that you can run self-hosted apps easily, but the main difference with Safebox is that it runs on any os with a single docker command. You don’t need to mess with terminals or commands afterward. Like Yunohost, you can install and manage apps through a web interface, while Safebox also adds geo-redundant backups and optional remote access,all in one interface.

Safebox is more about making it easier for home users to run self-hosted applications. You just need to run a single docker command, and the program will set up the web interface, application installation, SSL, reverse proxy, and optional remote access and geo-redundant backups. Cosmos cloud has more enterprise-level features, such as SSO, 2FA, and anti-DDoS, but it is also more complex

Thanks a lot for the kind words and the nice feedback.

The idea and most of the core development came from my father-in-law, he started it years ago with one of his friends. My partner and I joined later to help mostly with testing ,using it, and coming up with ideas for what features might make it more practical for everyday use. We spent a lot of time researching similar projects and reading through community discussions to see what people were saying about their experiences and needs in the self-hosted world. We really care about keeping everything simple and transparent, so the UI and website design were done by another friend of my father-in-law.

We know there’s still a lot left to do, and that it’ll probably keep cutting into our sunday lunches 😄 but we hope it’ll end up being something genuinely useful for others too

Thank you so much for your valuable feedback and kind words.

About the VPN configuration transfer, we’ve thought about it a lot, and in the end this seemed like the best solution: we hide the config behind a long random URL make it available for 5 minutes, and then delete the link. So, in theory an unauthorized user would have only five minutes to guess the URL and gain access. If you have a better idea, I’d really appreciate it.

As for backup_challenge_clients.sh it’s still a work in progress. It doesn’t work in the current beta version, and none of its features are available in the web interface yet. We’ll let you know once it’s implemented.

We’ll fix the nginx config, I promise 🙂 Just keep in mind this isn’t meant to be a public-facing site yet, since there’s no user authentication for now. But we’ll definitely review the web server setup too.

Thanks again for all your feedback, please keep helping us improve