3 ms·
> This way you don't need to sandbox the compiler, and it can freely use system resources and access source trees. You only need to sandbox the execution. If t
by iudqnolq 4y ago
> This way you don't need to sandbox the compiler, and it can freely use system resources and access source trees. You only need to sandbox the execution.
If this is now only helping CI and not dev machines I don't see why it's worth the effort. Wouldn't it be much simpler and more reliable to just sandbox compilation of anything in your CI?
> if you can't even -view the code- to tell if it's malicious without getting exploited, that's bad
I guess? I can't think of a single time in my life where this would have practically helped me.
I skim dependencies on GitHub for obvious red flags and then trust them. I assume places with the resources to do actual in-depth review can disable advanced analysis in their IDEs for that.
- brundolf 4y agoYou're digging in really hard trying to talk someone out of following good development practices because you don't personally think his effort is worth it. Personally, I don't think the effort being put into this argument is worth it.
- mlyle 4y ago> Wouldn't it be much simpler and more reliable to just sandbox compilation of anything in your CI? Not really. The compiler has to be able to access large swaths of your code. You want to e.g. keep your code safe. You would have to have very finely-grained sandboxing to prevent substantive disclosure, and even then you're likely leaking information.