| 1 |
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 11:30:42 +0200, Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
... |
| 3 |
> Sandbox should never ever be regarded as a security measure. It isn't. It |
| 4 |
> is almost trivial to subvert the sandbox. The reason for it's |
| 5 |
> effectiveness is solely that it's purpose is to protect against |
| 6 |
> accidental installing outside of the destination directory and so |
| 7 |
> subverting the package management (in short protecting against bad |
| 8 |
> makefiles and ebuilds). It IS NOT SECURE. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
So, if builds (and installs to temporary target) were done as a |
| 12 |
regular user, wouldn't that obviate the need for a sandbox at all? |
| 13 |
Also, this would make things a lot safer on macos (and presumably |
| 14 |
BSD), where the sandbox does not work. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Thanks, |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Chris |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives