Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default
by simon_o on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @09:00AM
(#35356604)
> want sandboxing to work by default
Yeah, wake me up when Flatpak is remotely close to doing this. Most "apps" simply disable the sandbox.
Not to mention I'm not going to trust "app" developers setting their own permissions. That's the job of package maintainers.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default
by bionade24 on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @09:41AM
(#35357151)
Afaik they disable filesystem sandboxing, not process namespaces. Still better if programs can't ptrace around, although this is indeed a big issue.
If someone knows why this sandboxing is better/worse than SELinux or AppArmor access rules, can you pls elaborate? I'd really like to know.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default
by simon_o on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @10:16AM
(#35357616)
I'm not comparing sandboxing against SELinux/AppArmor. It's a social problem, not a technical one.
I'm comparing "app developers holding themselves accountable" to "package maintainers dish out consequences for misbehavior".
I have absolutely zero trust in the former, and lots of trust in the latter.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default
by account42 on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @10:16AM
(#35357629)
You don't need any fancy packaging to restrict ptrace: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/security/Yama.txt
Building sandboxing on top of package management makes a lot of sense because you want sandboxing to work by default, and for that you need to identify the sandboxable things without making the user point to each one individually.