# Docker Hub policy changes create risks for community image publishers

DevFeed: [Docker Hub policy changes create risks for community image publishers](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/dodge-the-next-dockerpocalypse-how-to-own-your-own-docker-registry-address-19057.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://httptoolkit.com/blog/docker-image-registry-facade/>)

Author: HTTP Toolkit; Tim Perry

Published: 2023-03-17T11:00:00Z

Content type: article

Language: en

Sources: [HTTP Toolkit](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/http-toolkit.md>)

Topics: [Docker Hub](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/docker-hub.md>), [Docker](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/docker.md>), [Self-hosted](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/self-hosted.md>), [hosting](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/hosting.md>), [Monitoring](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/monitoring.md>)

Tags: [docker](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/docker.md>), [docker-registry](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/docker-registry.md>), [monitoring](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/monitoring.md>), [registry](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/registry.md>), [self-hosting](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/self-hosting.md>)

## AI overview

This commentary examines Docker Hub policy changes affecting community-run image publishers. It explains the impact on publishing control and considers self-hosting or migrating to another hosted Docker registry.

## Source excerpt

As you may have seen, Docker Hub made a dramatic shift in policy this week, and effectively gave a 30 day eviction notice to almost all community-run images. They've now made an apology to 'clarify' a few details, and helpfully take some of the hard edges off, but this still highlights a big problem. Fortunately, there are solutions. As initially described, this would've been catastrophic: Docker Hub has been used as the default host in tooling, tutorials, demos, blog posts, scripts, deployment definitions, CI builds and more for many years, and all those references were going to break - a self-inflicted left-pad for the Docker ecosystem. In their updated policy, it appears they now won't remove any existing images, but projects who don't pay up will not be able to publish any new images, so they've effectively lost control of the namespace they used to deploy to their communities unless they purchase a full team subscription. Many will not do so. This is an interesting challenge. Even if the existing images aren't removed, the direction of travel for Docker Hub is now clear: they don't want to host the core of the Docker community any more, no more freebies, pay up or go elsewhere (not unreasonable, but something of a rugpull after a full decade of the opposite). As a small/open-source/community/hobbyist image publisher, or if you depend on Docker Hub for free image publishing in any capacity, you now have a problem. They don't want you there. You're explicitly not their audience, and the rules will likely tighten further. This isn't unreasonable - it's their service and hosting isn't free - but it's worth considering explicitly and reacting accordingly. If you're not a paying Docker Hub customer, it's time to leave Docker Hub. The hard part is what to do instead. Self-hosting a registry is not free, and it's more work than it sounds: it's a proper piece of infrastructure, and comes with all the obligations that implies, from monitoring to promptly applying securit