Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Documentation for use your own SSL certs conflicts with docs from nginx-proxy #131

Open
maco opened this issue Jan 31, 2025 · 3 comments
Open
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@maco
Copy link
Contributor

maco commented Jan 31, 2025

https://jippi.github.io/docker-pixelfed/customize/faq/#how-do-i-use-my-own-ssl-certificate says to name them ${APP_DOMAIN}.cert.pem and ${APP_DOMAIN}.key.pem plus some chain files. However, the docs for nginx-proxy say:

The contents of /path/to/certs should contain the certificates and private keys for any virtual hosts in use. The certificate and keys should be named after the virtual host with a .crt and .key extension. For example, a container with VIRTUAL_HOST=foo.bar.com should have a foo.bar.com.crt and foo.bar.com.key file in the certs directory.

I'm trying to use this for local development with a self-signed certificate. I had ERR_SSL_UNRECOGNIZED_NAME_ALERT with no option to accept the certificate anyway when I followed this project's docs. After switching my filenames to localhost.crt and localhost.key and ignoring the chain ones, the browser started receiving a certificate and just complaining about it being self-signed, giving me an option to bypass that.

I thought about sending a patch to change the docs, but I don't know how the LetsEncrypt part interacts and didn't want to break the docs related to those.

Relatedly, the healthchecks on this project fail if the certificate is self-signed. I had to add -k to the curl commands.

@jippi
Copy link
Owner

jippi commented Feb 7, 2025

@maco did you figure out the right way this should work? If yes, I would love a docs PR update for it

It's entirely possible that it changed upstream and now our docs is just wrong

@maco
Copy link
Contributor Author

maco commented Feb 7, 2025

For self-signed local dev, yes. But that doesn't involve the chain & full chain, so I don't know how those factor in for using this in production.

I could add a subsection to the docs, explaining the local dev use case.

@jippi
Copy link
Owner

jippi commented Feb 7, 2025

love the idea of a section for using it for development - but lets make it a new page under Customization dedicated to it :) lets of stuff to expand on there in the future with dev containers, etc. :D

@jippi jippi added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Feb 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants