upvote
> But if I see a user that exposes a server without a dedicated IP address, and they use tailscale for this, the way I would describe it is that they are adding a third party node that routes traffic for them (just to provide multiplexing), so in terms of security, it's an additional unnecessary man in the middle.

If you are listening on a public IP, you can trivially be attacked by anyone on the Internet.

If you listen on a private IP that only Tailscale can reach directly, you can only be attacked by Tailscale itself, or by anyone who successfully infiltrated Tailscale's network.

Should you run plaintext protocols over Tailscale? Absolutely not. But you're going to receive orders of magnitude less malicious traffic on a server accessible only over Tailscale compared to a server listening on the public Internet.

reply
Yeah, but to the extent that the server is useful, it needs to be exposed to the internet.

If you make your tailscale available to the internet through tailscale, you are still weak to external attackers, putting a VPN in the middle doesn't fundamentally change that dynamic, maybe it shifts it around and it confuses you enough to feel less shifty about it.

But it doesn't decrease your risk, if your HTTP server is weak to a tailscalething.tld/../../etc/ attack, it doesn't really matter that requests to other ports are blocked, (which probably don't even have processes listening anyways)

reply
> Yeah, but to the extent that the server is useful, it needs to be exposed to the internet.

Not if it's a private server, like the poster above was describing. For example, if I want to maintain a NAS to store my photos and view them anytime, I am better off running it on a Tailscale network that only I (and some friends/family) can acces, no reason to expose it publicly and then try to secure it.

reply
This use case you have in mind where someone has a fixed server and uses tailscale to patch over the lack of IP, I think is a very rare use case.
reply