There are some services that I expose to the internet (using Apache reverse proxy) that really should be accessed by only a small set of devices. Requiring client certificates seems like a great way to reduce the attack surface and prevent brute force attacks (since the attacker doesn’t even get a chance to attempt a login).
I wonder about the difficulty on the client side as well as other practical implications. The clients are smartphones of various makes.
MTLS is great protection, but the use case must support it. For example, if you want your app to support registration for new accounts or if you have a lot of people you want to have access, that might make mTLS unwieldy to manage.
I host apps behind Traefik reverse proxy, using the d.rymcg.tech framework. It make it easy to protect your apps behind HTTP basic auth, Oauth2, or mTLS(or any combination).
I use Tailscale for this, with my own Headscale server so that I am in control of everything. It’s a much easier approach that is more likely to pass the spousal acceptance factor.
This. Tailscale just works and has functioning VPN on demand for your networks.
I’m already running Headscale, and it works great. But to expose individual services to individual devices it feels like an overkill. I don’t actually need all these devices to connect to the tailnet all the time, and some of these devices I don’t even want to be able to access the entire tailnet.
