When Local-Only And Self-Hosted Matters

Self-hosting isn't overthinking.
Local-only isn't paranoia.
It's a possibility to reclaim the ownership of your data.

Is it because of sensitive information?
Or is it for laws and policies?

The threat model changes, and the responsibilities shift.
Local-only is a solution to secure your most valuable assets.

Limited Exposure With Self-Hosted Systems

Public services are comfortable:

low-maintenance
high-impact
fast return

The problem?
Your data is handled by third parties. Exposed.
It's not a breach, but: you have to carefully consider what you share.
How you share.

Local-only limits this information exposure.

The trade-off?

maintenance
complexity

Self-hosted isn't always required.
It's a possibility to influence information exposure.

Stronger Security Choices

Self-hosted and local-only services aren't immediately secure.
It's a shift in responsibilities and mindset.

It ensures:

Access to the host physically.
Access to the operating system and its configuration.
Direct influence on security settings.
Immediate actions when fast response is necessary.

You maintain direct control over your data.

Isolated System Example

SaaS source control management (SCM) is the standard.
Source code is a value. An asset.

programming
inventory
configuration

The risk of a data exposure is unacceptable.

A self-hosted Gitea server is a good case-study.

A git clone is never a backup: a local git server is.
With multi-remote configuration - public repos are in sync in SaaS.
Private repos remain within your controlled environment.

Final Whisper

Real security isn't measured in money.
It isn't about the tools.
It's the mindset. The architecture.

Self-hosted systems can limit the attack surface, and keep the data within your trust boundary.