2 ms·

> ...GKE uses gVisor Another commentator on this thread points out that GKE uses trimmed-down Chromium OS? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25884851 https:

> ...GKE uses gVisor Another commentator on this thread points out that GKE uses trimmed-down Chromium OS? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25884851 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25884851 Edit: I guess container-optimized Chromium OS and gVisor are complementary (that is, you're welcome to run your app in gVisor sandboxed containers on a guest VM running Google's container-optimized OS). Ref: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/playground/+/195983 https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/playground/+/195983

tptacek 6y ago
See, for instance, https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/containers-kubernetes/how-gvisor-protects-google-cloud-services-from-cve-2020-14386 https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/containers-kubernetes...
- ignoramous 6y ago
  Thanks. I remember mrkurt say fly.io evaluated gVisor but settled on Firecracker eventually, though, I must ask: can gVisor on its own achieve same level of protection as micro-VMs? Even if not, can the protection offered by application kernels like gVisor and Kata be considered enough for multi-tenant workloads (like the one fly.io runs) inside the same guest (VM)? Also, if I may, in what cases would one prefer to use Firecracker managed micro-VM running gVisor sandboxed containers? I'd imagine gVisor slows things down, so it might not be for everyone, but I'm curious as to what value-add might make gVisor worth that.
  - tptacek 6y ago
    That's a tough question to answer! I spent some time on it in the blog post, and a lot more time that I didn't write about hacking on little bits of gVisor while researching that post. My take is, no, I don't think gVisor is as secure as Firecracker; it's way more ambitious and has a larger attack surface. But I buy that it is substantially better than OS-sandboxed container runtimes, and I would probably trust it for multitenant workloads. (Kata, as I understand it, is mostly about microvm containers; I like Firecracker almost as much for its implementation, which I think is pretty gorgeous, as for the microvm design choice, but I like 'em both fine I guess. Also, there's a Firecracker-based Kata that people use, right?)

tptacek 6y ago

See, for instance, https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/containers-kubernetes/how-gvisor-protects-google-cloud-services-from-cve-2020-14386 https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/containers-kubernetes...

ignoramous 6y ago
Thanks. I remember mrkurt say fly.io evaluated gVisor but settled on Firecracker eventually, though, I must ask: can gVisor on its own achieve same level of protection as micro-VMs? Even if not, can the protection offered by application kernels like gVisor and Kata be considered enough for multi-tenant workloads (like the one fly.io runs) inside the same guest (VM)? Also, if I may, in what cases would one prefer to use Firecracker managed micro-VM running gVisor sandboxed containers? I'd imagine gVisor slows things down, so it might not be for everyone, but I'm curious as to what value-add might make gVisor worth that.
- tptacek 6y ago
  That's a tough question to answer! I spent some time on it in the blog post, and a lot more time that I didn't write about hacking on little bits of gVisor while researching that post. My take is, no, I don't think gVisor is as secure as Firecracker; it's way more ambitious and has a larger attack surface. But I buy that it is substantially better than OS-sandboxed container runtimes, and I would probably trust it for multitenant workloads. (Kata, as I understand it, is mostly about microvm containers; I like Firecracker almost as much for its implementation, which I think is pretty gorgeous, as for the microvm design choice, but I like 'em both fine I guess. Also, there's a Firecracker-based Kata that people use, right?)