[Icecast] Why I responded publicly [WAS: admin console]
5f787a at i2pmail.org
Fri Feb 14 08:40:27 UTC 2020
> On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 14:59 +0000, user wrote:
> > Philipp Schafft, who allow you to publish my private message?
> I could also ask who allowed you to send me unwanted private messages?
At this point any message from Philipp Schafft to me becomes absolutely
> In fact I did not notice it was sent privately until after my reply. It
Notice can be found on third string of the quoted header. There is no other
recipients, only Philipp Schafft, who trying to talk about security, but
does not respect privacy as we see now.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020
From: user <5f787a at ...>
To: Philipp Schafft <lion at lion.leol...>
Subject: Re: [Icecast] admin console
> Good evening,
> On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 19:20 +0000, user wrote:
> > 2020-01-08 09:59, Marvin Scholz wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, 2020-01-06 at 10:24 +0000, user wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm consider to put icecast behind reverse proxy. It is not so easy
> > > > as I think before. Does anyone have experience with it?
> > >
> > > In general putting Icecast behind a reverse proxy is not the best idea
> > > as some webservers are not really made out of the box to easily deal
> > > with the kind of usage Icecast will usually produce (long running
> > > connections serving a continuous stream). Additionally Icecast is not
> > > really capable currently do deal with being reverse-proxied properly
> > > so some things will break when doing that.
> > >
> > > So unless you want to shoot yourself in the foot and run into various
> > > issues I would not recommend to do it.
> > Expectation on malicious activity force me to put icecast behind reverse
> > proxy. It was not easy, but works very well.
> So, what kind of "malicious activity" exactly? And what exact HTTP level
> software is more robust against those activities than Icecast?
> I'm fully in support that active components on lower levels can be helpful
> in some situations. But I would love to hear about any analysis indicating
> specific request patterns that would be better handled by external
> software. If you would share your information rather than keeping us in
> the dark about specifics it would enable us to improve Icecast for all
> users including you. :)
> With best regards,
1. First of all I would like to deny access to everything except
More information about the Icecast