| 1 |
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 2 |
<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Thu, 15 May 2014 17:15:32 +0000 |
| 4 |
> hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh: |
| 6 |
>> > Sandboxing isn't about security. |
| 7 |
>> > |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Sure it is. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Then where do the bug reports for all the "security violations" |
| 12 |
> possible with sandbox go? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
There is a big difference between the sandbox utility |
| 16 |
(sys-apps/sandbox) and the network-sandbox/ipc-sandbox features. The |
| 17 |
former uses an LD_PRELOAD hack to intercept libc functions, and does |
| 18 |
not provide any security benefit. The latter options create separate |
| 19 |
namespaces in the kernel, which is probably a lot more secure. |
Archives