

This is what I would try first. It looks like 1337 is the exposed port, per https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor/blob/master/Dockerfile
x-logging:
&default-logging
options:
max-size: '10m'
max-file: '5'
driver: json-file
services:
mongo:
image: mongo:4.4
volumes:
- ${NS_MONGO_DATA_DIR:-./mongo-data}:/data/db:cached
logging: *default-logging
nightscout:
image: nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor:latest
container_name: nightscout
restart: always
depends_on:
- mongo
logging: *default-logging
ports:
- 1337:1337
environment:
### Variables for the container
NODE_ENV: production
TZ: [removed]
### Overridden variables for Docker Compose setup
# The `nightscout` service can use HTTP, because we use `nginx` to serve the HTTPS
# and manage TLS certificates
INSECURE_USE_HTTP: 'true'
# For all other settings, please refer to the Environment section of the README
### Required variables
# MONGO_CONNECTION - The connection string for your Mongo database.
# Something like mongodb://sally:sallypass@ds099999.mongolab.com:99999/nightscout
# The default connects to the `mongo` included in this docker-compose file.
# If you change it, you probably also want to comment out the entire `mongo` service block
# and `depends_on` block above.
MONGO_CONNECTION: mongodb://mongo:27017/nightscout
# API_SECRET - A secret passphrase that must be at least 12 characters long.
API_SECRET: [removed]
### Features
# ENABLE - Used to enable optional features, expects a space delimited list, such as: careportal rawbg iob
# See https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor#plugins for details
ENABLE: careportal rawbg iob
# AUTH_DEFAULT_ROLES (readable) - possible values readable, denied, or any valid role name.
# When readable, anyone can view Nightscout without a token. Setting it to denied will require
# a token from every visit, using status-only will enable api-secret based login.
AUTH_DEFAULT_ROLES: denied
# For all other settings, please refer to the Environment section of the README
# https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor#environment
I’m not a lawyer, but I believe that if the Lemmy instance’s ToS indicates where disputes will be resolved, and either the site owner resides there or is an LLC that is registered there, that you could sue Meta in that location.
Meta is big enough that they are most likely conducting business there (even if digitally) and you could also show that the harm suffered was suffered there.