FRESH

Hacker News

Home

A native graphical shell for SSH

66 points by mrcslws

by trashb

1 subcomments

I like the idea of separating the frontend and backend of a graphical app. But I feel like this is hardly a novel idea, maybe I'm missing something.
I take it you don't know about "X11Forwarding yes" or "html5 web app"
```
  For browsers, capabilities like connecting to Unix sockets have been dismissed as extremely niche
```
That is a security concern, that's why it isn't implemented. At least raw unix socks. You can have WebSockets and other ports only limited to http.

by purplehat_

1 subcomments

i'm trying to understand how outer shell works here. on the website you give the following as your motivation:
> Apps like Jupyter and Tensorboard are not typically visible to standard web browsers if they’re running on remote servers, because it would be terribly unsafe to let the whole internet touch this app. Instead, they run on a local port on the server, which your computer can’t access directly.
> Classically, to get access to these, you had to open a new terminal and run:
> ssh -L 24601:localhost:8889 mrcslws@lambda4.mycompany.com &
> ssh -L 24602:localhost:6006 mrcslws@lambda4.mycompany.com &
is this true? isn't the normal thing just to do this ssh forwarding for prototyping, then for deployment, you set up a website like myjupyternotebook.com, and then set up auth so that others can't access it. HTTP basic auth is not too much work.
if you want SSH, not HTTP, to be what's publicly exposed, there's other options too, like putting it behind a VPN or tunnel.
all this to say, outer loop is super cool, but I don't get it. I must be missing something about why you built it, so could you help me understand?

by saltamimi

0 subcomment

One of the more interesting pieces of Microsoft software is the Windows Admin Center where it's a web app to configure a Windows Server. Ideally, it was made for core installs where there's no GUI but it's there as a viable web management panel.
The tool from OP and WAC are pretty similar in terms of functionality and usecase. Why would you want this? Well, imagine your team needing to be able to do server functions but you have less technical team members to do it for you, which is very often the case in big places, most people are familiar with the web browser and having a website to do these sorts of actions makes it easier to have things done in one place without a lot of tools like Remote Desktop, SSH, WinRM, etc. configured.

by setheron

0 subcomment

I'm confused -- does this compile it live when the server ships code? How do we resolve dependencies, toolset etc.. Is the idea to just pick an old enough platform toolchain you expect to be present?

by dwb

0 subcomment

Just had a quick look but I like the look so far. I’ve been thinking along similar lines for ages but never quite got around to making something. I very much support any effort to make remoting less dependent on the archaic character grid.

by tom1337890

0 subcomment

Lovely video and ingenious implementation. Kudos!
As someone managing various servers, both at home and at work, I see how this can be really useful. I see it not in the production space yet but rather in the experimenting, using a Linux machine as a second compute device!
So regarding your last point, I'm convinced. I think it is useful! The one fact that is bugging me is that now it requires a client specific app, with GUI, on my PC and I wonder if using ssh port forwarding could reduce the surface. I mean I wonder if either having a rich client that executes commands via ssh or a rich server (including Web Server) with ssh port wouldn't suffice, so that I can avoid installing stuff on the server AND on my computer.

by nativeit

1 subcomments

I thought this looks interesting, but was a little confused with what appears to be MacOS-only support at https://outerloop.sh/? I'm running Ubuntu 24.04, I kind of assumed from context that it'd be something I could spin up in a few minutes just to give it a go?

by flying_sheep

1 subcomments

That's interesting idea. If we put into CLI with some ANSI escape code, that may become something real. Imagine a normal terminal app just render part of the UI in web and communicating in UNIX socket. While doing the fancy UI, everything is still controllable with keyboard, and optionally with mouse. The UI will fallback to text UI for older terminal

by torm

0 subcomment

I can’t make up my mind if I love it or hate it. On one hand this is like SSHapi on the other there’s no structure, no contract… i had similar doubts with Cockpit.

by akshayKMR

0 subcomment

This is cool. Though I don't see why someone would want to do more work/design for the custom GUI rendering for a custom/renderer (your viewer app) ?

by myaccountonhn

0 subcomment

I am not sure I'd use this over exposing websites with wireguard as those will automatically work across platforms. But it looks like you could create some really cool experiences with it, and I'm happy people are exploring this space.

by toenail

1 subcomments

Interesting, kind of like a more fancy web shell. Haven't really ever seen the need for those, mostly because terminals work better than browsers.

by supertroop

2 subcomments

Defeats the purpose of the shell. The shell is for CLI interaction.

by PunchyHamster

0 subcomment

> Isn’t it weird that this doesn’t already exist?
It does. MobaXterm have a bunch of it already, file manager on the side and ability to pass X11

by CamperBob2

2 subcomments

Edit: withdrawing this objection, had no idea that right-clicking allowed the speed to be adjusted.

by arnefm

0 subcomment

Heresy!