2 ms·
Really "not at all"? Isn't that more secure than chroot? I do agree with you that VMs, at least, would be more secure. But hosting thousands of VMs takes subst
by mirimir 8y ago
Really "not at all"? Isn't that more secure than chroot?
I do agree with you that VMs, at least, would be more secure. But hosting thousands of VMs takes substantial resources. And when there's free shared hosting available, few would understand enough to pay the premium.