3 ms·
I am not saying that it isn't a footgun, but it is not a conscious decision of Docker to "override" or "insert an allow rule", who actively bypass restrictions
by remram 4y ago
I am not saying that it isn't a footgun, but it is not a conscious decision of Docker to "override" or "insert an allow rule", who actively bypass restrictions if they exist. Rather the situation is a result of implementing this the "naive" way, doing forwarding in the "nat" table that is meant for other hosts (e.g. treating containers as distinct hosts, which in a sense they are, since they have their own (virtual) network interfaces and port namespace).
VirtualBox works the same way, if you use the bridge networking. So does kvm. And so does Podman, I am not sure why you thought otherwise (maybe there is a mode where it uses a userspace proxy rather than iptables? When running rootless for example? Does not happen on my machine, ufw rules are ignored).