Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Optionally drop --privileged and other insecure flags #31

Open
vadorovsky opened this issue Apr 27, 2021 · 3 comments
Open

Optionally drop --privileged and other insecure flags #31

vadorovsky opened this issue Apr 27, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@vadorovsky
Copy link

One of toolbox's use cases for me is having a container with compilers and development tools. For such containers I would prefer to not use --privileged, not mount /dev and other sensitive directories if not needed.

Since the main use case of toolbox is debugging (which requires those flags and the goal is not sandboxing), I think it would make sense to have a CLI option for creating more sandboxed/secure containers.
@dfaggioli
Copy link
Member

For what is worth, this makes sense to me. I would keep toolbox privileged and unsafe by default, because as you said, toolbox's goal is not sandboxing. But it should be possible to have something like this as an option. I may be able to draft something in the next days, but I can't be sure about that, so anyone feel free to beat me to it. :-)

@vadorovsky
Copy link
Author

I was actually thinking about finding some time to do that, but if you are interested in that feature too and want to do that soon (next days / next week), then go on. :)

dfaggioli added a commit to dfaggioli/microos-toolbox that referenced this issue May 7, 2022
@dfaggioli
Add a "more sandboxing" mode
175c5de 
toolbox is not meant for providing security and strong isolation, and
probably never will be. Still, users asked a simple way to start less
privileged toolboxes.

Of course, such a toolbox will be less convenient to use, because of the
lack of sharing with the host.

Of course^2, even in this mode, good security and strong isolation
should not be assumed!

openSUSE#31

Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <[email protected]>
@dfaggioli
Copy link
Member

I tried to address this (or at least, to start doing that) in #42 . Let me know what you think.

dfaggioli added a commit to dfaggioli/microos-toolbox that referenced this issue May 11, 2022
@dfaggioli
Add a "more sandboxing" mode
ae8d0c9 
toolbox is not meant for providing security and strong isolation, and
probably never will be. Still, users asked a simple way to start less
privileged toolboxes.

Of course, such a toolbox will be less convenient to use, because of the
lack of sharing with the host.

Of course^2, even in this mode, good security and strong isolation
should not be assumed!

openSUSE#31

Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <[email protected]>
thkukuk pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 12, 2022
@dfaggioli @thkukuk
Add a "more sandboxing" mode
fba05ac 
toolbox is not meant for providing security and strong isolation, and
probably never will be. Still, users asked a simple way to start less
privileged toolboxes.

Of course, such a toolbox will be less convenient to use, because of the
lack of sharing with the host.

Of course^2, even in this mode, good security and strong isolation
should not be assumed!

#31

Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@dfaggioli @vadorovsky