Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Which Sandboxing application is more secure?

Graphical Environments, Managers, Multimedia & Desktop questions.
Locked
Message
Author
hack3rcon
Posts: 746
Joined: 2015-02-16 09:54
Has thanked: 48 times

Re: Which Sandboxing application is more secure?

#16 Post by hack3rcon »

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:
bester69 wrote:snaps or flatpaks seems the easy and secure way to go
Please read the article to which I linked in my last post — the "sandboxing" offered by flatpak is utter rubbish: almost all applications allow complete access to the files in your home directory so https://xkcd.com/1200/ applies. Snaps are even worse because Comical's Snap Store isn't vetted at all: https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/05/ubuntu-snap-malware
hack3rcon wrote:You can use SELinux as a sandboxing too
SELinux can be used to restrict permissions but that's not the same as a sandbox.
That seems to use Seccomp BPF for isolation so it works in the same way as firejail.
hack3rcon wrote:I want to run Telegram in a Sandboxing program
If you're paranoid use a VM but Telegram is available as a (reproducible) Debian package so firejail is probably good enough (IMO).
Is Mbox lighter than firejail and offer same features?

Locked