4 ms·

The future is sandboxed apps with flatpak. Who cares if Spotify is malware when it can't access anything. Wayland, SELinux, Flatpak, PipeWire. These will save

The future is sandboxed apps with flatpak. Who cares if Spotify is malware when it can't access anything. Wayland, SELinux, Flatpak, PipeWire. These will save us or at least reduce the problem of evil maintainers. This model has been tried and proven for over a decade on mobile. What we call malware on mobile is simply the app doing bad things with what you enter in to the app itself and not the desktop class "steals all your data and then encrypts it"

swiley 6y ago
Encouraging people to run random binaries from strangers is probably worse.
cycomanic 6y ago
Except that often the sandboxed apps are also a nuisance to work with. They don't pick up themes from the desktop, keyboard shortcuts don't work anymore (if you have e.g. set some global shortcuts), exchanging data with other programs can be a pain as well...
- SilverRed 6y ago
  They are only a nuisance right now. Almost all of the issues you encounter are minor implementation problems and not fundamental issues with sandboxing or flatpak. Things are getting better.
eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> The future is sandboxed apps with flatpak. If the sandbox is configured by the same person or organization that writes the code there's no improvement in trust. That's why package maintainers have a role in Linux distributions.
flyinghamster 6y ago
I'd like to agree, but as always, the problem is the security/ease-of-use tradeoff. SELinux can be a nightmare to deal with, particularly if you're compiling an application from source and you want to take advantage of it (and even if you aren't, it can lead to mysterious failures). I managed to make Asterisk work in SELinux, until I tried to add a Bluetooth channel module to the mix. At that point, I was backed into a corner; there just didn't seem to be a way for me to let Asterisk access Bluetooth with SELinux running.
bscphil 6y ago
No. The solution to the problem of evil m̶a̶i̶n̶t̶a̶i̶n̶e̶r̶s independent software vendors is maintainers. See http://kmkeen.com/maintainers-matter/ http://kmkeen.com/maintainers-matter/
- SilverRed 6y ago
  Maintainers do not review code. At best they test it to make sure it works. The Debian maintainers let in a timebomb borderline malware in to the xscreensaver package without them noticing it. Maintainers do not have the time or ability to check for even intentional malware let alone security bugs.
andrey_utkin 6y ago
So you count on SELinux. Who maintains SELinux policies for you, so that it knows what is allowed to a program and what isn't? It's people just like other software maintainets. There is no way around having to trust somebody else.

swiley 6y ago

Encouraging people to run random binaries from strangers is probably worse.

cycomanic 6y ago

Except that often the sandboxed apps are also a nuisance to work with. They don't pick up themes from the desktop, keyboard shortcuts don't work anymore (if you have e.g. set some global shortcuts), exchanging data with other programs can be a pain as well...

SilverRed 6y ago
They are only a nuisance right now. Almost all of the issues you encounter are minor implementation problems and not fundamental issues with sandboxing or flatpak. Things are getting better.

eeZah7Ux 6y ago

> The future is sandboxed apps with flatpak. If the sandbox is configured by the same person or organization that writes the code there's no improvement in trust. That's why package maintainers have a role in Linux distributions.

flyinghamster 6y ago

I'd like to agree, but as always, the problem is the security/ease-of-use tradeoff. SELinux can be a nightmare to deal with, particularly if you're compiling an application from source and you want to take advantage of it (and even if you aren't, it can lead to mysterious failures). I managed to make Asterisk work in SELinux, until I tried to add a Bluetooth channel module to the mix. At that point, I was backed into a corner; there just didn't seem to be a way for me to let Asterisk access Bluetooth with SELinux running.

bscphil 6y ago

No. The solution to the problem of evil m̶a̶i̶n̶t̶a̶i̶n̶e̶r̶s independent software vendors is maintainers. See http://kmkeen.com/maintainers-matter/ http://kmkeen.com/maintainers-matter/

SilverRed 6y ago
Maintainers do not review code. At best they test it to make sure it works. The Debian maintainers let in a timebomb borderline malware in to the xscreensaver package without them noticing it. Maintainers do not have the time or ability to check for even intentional malware let alone security bugs.

andrey_utkin 6y ago

So you count on SELinux. Who maintains SELinux policies for you, so that it knows what is allowed to a program and what isn't? It's people just like other software maintainets. There is no way around having to trust somebody else.