This will break any software that wants to communicate with itself on your local machine. And it would be a conflict because you would have 2 machines using the localhost IP address. but technically it's valid. Just a conflict.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 10:34 AM Keith Smith via PLUG-discuss < [email protected]> wrote: > Thank you all for your responses. > > Someone suggested setting the virtual machine IP to the local host IP of > 127.0.0.1. > > I use the Linux and Win hosts files to create a kind of local DNS. I > use a private IP such as 192,168,20.65, making the hosts entry > "192,168,20.65<tab>example.internal". I do not think an entry like > "127.0.0.1<tab>example.internal" would work. > > I'm a PHP Dev and I know a bit of Linux so I am unqualified to say if it > would be ok to use "127.0.0.1<tab>example.internal" in my hosts files. > > --- > Lets ask ChatGPT > Prompt : would it be ok to use "127.0.0.1<tab>example.internal" in my > windows and Linux hosts files? > Chat's reply: > > Yes, it's perfectly okay to use: > > 127.0.0.1 example.internal > > in your Windows and Linux hosts files — and you can absolutely use a tab > character or spaces between the IP and the hostname. Both operating > systems support this. > ✅ Valid Example > > 127.0.0.1 example.internal > > or > > 127.0.0.1 example.internal > > (both tab and spaces are fine) > 📌 Important Notes: > > .internal is valid for private/local use > > Although .internal is not a public top-level domain, it’s fine > to use on local networks or development environments. > > Just avoid using real domains unless you own them. > > No DNS lookup involved > > When you map example.internal to 127.0.0.1, your system will > skip DNS and directly resolve it to localhost. > > Location of hosts file: > > Windows: C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts > > Linux: /etc/hosts > > Permissions: > > You’ll need admin/sudo privileges to edit the hosts file on both > systems. > > 🛠️ Use Case Example > > Useful for local development: > > 127.0.0.1 mysite.local > 127.0.0.1 admin.example.internal > 127.0.0.1 php.test > > You can now open http://example.internal in your browser, and it will > route to your local server (e.g., Apache/Nginx on 127.0.0.1). > > --- > Chat says it is ok, however it seems to be just wrong! > > It seems that some on the list are using VirtualBox on their daily > driver. Given I use private IP addresses and non routable domains maybe > it is ok. > > I think all my LAMP configurations are name-based virtual hosting. Given > this I can create a "shared hosting" type of configuration where > multiple virtual hosts use the sane IP address. > > Other than running lots of stuff on Kubuntu, my daily, I wonder how > risky that would be virus running a separate box running VirtualBox or > Proxmox, > > Your thoughts? > > Thanks!! > Keith > > > > On 2025-07-16 13:20, Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss wrote: > > I would not do this in my situation, but if i had needs and the > > desktop is the only thing i had to work with I would use docker or a > > VM in order to segment it afro my workstation/desktop > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 4:57 AM Scott L. via PLUG-discuss > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> If it's bound to localhost (127.0.0.1[https://127.0.0.1]), is not > >> opening > >> listening ports externally (or said ports are blocked), and is > >> effectively walled off from the Internet, the risk is very low. > >> > >> You could always block the program at the software level (and I > >> would), > >> but ideally you'd want to avoid forwarding any ports or allowing > >> external > >> (WAN) communication. > >> > >> It's not unusual to run a web server on-demand, such as to preview a > >> web > >> page you're coding (e.g., when utilizing a JS-based framework). This > >> > >> would be preferable to running it 24/7 if possible. > >> > >> The weak point will probably be your router. Most consumer routers > >> allow > >> you to manually forward ports (which you wouldn't want to do here), > >> but > >> they'll also often automatically allow the program out via either > >> UPnP > >> and/or NAT-PMP (if requested). > >> > >> If you know the program doesn't trigger that, or you've disabled it, > >> you > >> should be fine. It's really a matter of segmenting it from the > >> Internet. > >> If you're confident that you can do that, then you should be golden. > >> > >> --- > >> Scott Lopez > >> Email: [email protected] > >> Web: https://bio.neteng.pro > >> ---------------------------------------- > >> > >> Jul 14, 2025 1:43:29 AM David Schwartz <[email protected]>: > >> > >>> I found that article and forwarded it to Keith. It was > >> specifically > >>> about setting up and running a local web service for your own > >> personal > >>> needs. The guy was not a developer. In fact, a couple of things he > >> said > >>> he uses this for suggest just the opposite. He very briefly > >> mentions > >>> external access, but that was clearly not the focus of the > >> article. > >>> > >>> But I think Keith's question has to do with security implications > >> of > >>> running a local web service on your main machine for LOCAL use at > >>> localhost. > >>> > >>> I’ve got a LAN at home and I’ve given some thought to what it > >> would > >>> take to run a server on one machine ONLY for internal access. I > >> almost > >>> set it up at one point, but changed my mind, but I haven’t ruled > >> it > >>> out. > >>> > >>> That article includes a single command you can run on a Mac to > >> turn on > >>> your web server. > >>> > >>> Windows includes IIS, and he shows how to activate it. Newer > >> versions > >>> only install it if you request, and it’s easy to start it up as > >> a > >>> service. > >>> > >>> But MAMP, WAMP, and similar solutions have been available for > >> about 20 > >>> years now and I haven’t heard much about any security issues > >> simply > >>> from running them on localhost / 127.0.0.1[https://127.0.0.1] . > >>> > >>> Is there anything to worry about? > >>> > >>> -David Schwartz > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jul 14, 2025, at 12:10 AM, Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Honestly, > >>>> I would rather the web server be on it’s own dedicated vm with > >> minimal > >>>> other services running and it’s own internal IP address on a > >> virtual > >>>> bridge answerable to the external ethernet interface. This is > >> actually > >>>> similar to what I ran post 2000 using VMWARE. > >>>> External ethernet card 1: unposted by host OS, linked to OpenBSD > >> vm as > >>>> internet interface > >>>> 2nd ethernet interface was attached to internal virtual bridge > >> that > >>>> was also connected as a second interface to the openBSD vm. Host > >> OS > >>>> was linked to virtual bridge along with all other vm’s. This > >> way, all > >>>> instances and the host OS were protected behind the OpenBSD > >> instance > >>>> which acted as the firewall. One of those instances was a web > >> server > >>>> that hosted a simple website (one of the many things I tried to > >> learn > >>>> how to do). > >>>> > >>>> At the time, that configuration for VMWare was not even > >> supported, let > >>>> alone documented. So, I had a pretty unique setup (and I did > >> document > >>>> it eventually and submitted it to the dev team at VMWare). Oh > >> man, > >>>> were they surprised. > >>>> > >>>> -Eric > >>>> From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Virtual > >> Environments > >>>> Coordinator Dept. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Jul 13, 2025, at 3:00 PM, Keith Smith via PLUG-discuss > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> A friend sent me an article about a guy that always configures a > >> web > >>>> server on his desktop. I did some work with a guy who configured > >> his > >>>> daily driver MAC as a web server and used it for development. > >>>> > >>>> I'm running Kubuntu on my desk top and Ubuntu on my > >> virtualization. > >>>> > >>>> I could configure my desktop as a web server.... however I an not > >> so > >>>> sure I want to. > >>>> > >>>> My main concern is security. > >>>> > >>>> What are your thoughts? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks!! > >>>> > >>>> Keith > >>>> --------------------------------------------------- > >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] > >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > >>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------- > >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] > >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > >>>> > >> > > > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss--------------------------------------------------- > >> PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] > >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > >> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > > > -- > > A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from > > rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. > > > > Stephen > > --------------------------------------------------- > > PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen
--------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list: [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
