2 ms·

I've been running Claude Code with --dangerously-skip-permissions in a Docker container for the last month or so, allowing me to get up and stretch my legs whil

I've been running Claude Code with --dangerously-skip-permissions in a Docker container for the last month or so, allowing me to get up and stretch my legs while it does its thing. I definitely wouldn't want to run it unsandboxed.

jsiepkes 2mo ago
Same here. I use this utility to make it easier on Linux to run Claude in Podman: https://github.com/mismosmi/ai-pod https://github.com/mismosmi/ai-pod
franze 2mo ago
I built an (overengineered) app for that AIFCC https://apps.apple.com/app/aifcc-ai-first-computer/id6782364574 https://apps.apple.com/app/aifcc-ai-first-computer/id6782364... runs a sandboxed linux on your mac, and the agents have full system rights within there and run in yolo mode
- Barbing 2mo ago
  I like the pitch. Three-month free trial is impressive. Any limitations you were frustrated by releasing it on the App Store? Any drawbacks that you (or other readers) find overall?
lukan 2mo ago
Another nice option to do this while staying in control, is activate /remote-control and approve from mobile while walking around.
konsnos 2mo ago
Can you share your experience? What did you flag during those sessions?
kmeh 2mo ago
[dead]
allan_s 2mo ago
There's actually a setting.json key to not have to put the option
etoxin 2mo ago
I'm using Docker Sandboxes with a custom Kit. The cli is nice and the TUI is also good. https://docs.docker.com/ai/sandboxes/ https://docs.docker.com/ai/sandboxes/
SchemaLoad 2mo ago
Sandboxing seems like the obvious solution. These tools prompt me to review an absurd number of very complex bash commands where there is realistically no way to carefully review them. I just want to put the thing in a box with the code and let it run any number of commands on the code without prompting.
- eru 2mo ago
  You can actually use a hook to have a script review the (bash) commands for you.
  - SchemaLoad 2mo ago
    This is still less safe and less convenient than sandboxing. I want them to be able to run whatever command they want inside the sandbox even if it's traditionally dangerous (overwrites files, etc) because it can't touch anything that matters and I can revert any changes to the code myself. If anything the only thing you'd have to have reviewed is sandbox escape attempts.
    - eru 2mo ago
      You are right. And the hook is for convenience, not for safety. Having explicit sandboxes is good, of course. But in addition I also treat my whole computer like a sandbox, it least in the sense that there's no files I would mind if they were overwritten or deleted: you should have backups anyway.
arvyy 2mo ago
same, and unlike other repliers, I'll say one doesn't need to reinvent a new tool for this. Just use devcontainers.
- croemer 2mo ago
  Same, I've also been running with `--dangerously-skip-permissions` in devcontainers with docker volumes to keep Claude/Codex auth tokens. Works really well!

jsiepkes 2mo ago

Same here. I use this utility to make it easier on Linux to run Claude in Podman: https://github.com/mismosmi/ai-pod https://github.com/mismosmi/ai-pod

franze 2mo ago

I built an (overengineered) app for that AIFCC https://apps.apple.com/app/aifcc-ai-first-computer/id6782364574 https://apps.apple.com/app/aifcc-ai-first-computer/id6782364... runs a sandboxed linux on your mac, and the agents have full system rights within there and run in yolo mode

Barbing 2mo ago
I like the pitch. Three-month free trial is impressive. Any limitations you were frustrated by releasing it on the App Store? Any drawbacks that you (or other readers) find overall?

lukan 2mo ago

Another nice option to do this while staying in control, is activate /remote-control and approve from mobile while walking around.

konsnos 2mo ago

Can you share your experience? What did you flag during those sessions?

kmeh 2mo ago

[dead]

allan_s 2mo ago

There's actually a setting.json key to not have to put the option

etoxin 2mo ago

I'm using Docker Sandboxes with a custom Kit. The cli is nice and the TUI is also good. https://docs.docker.com/ai/sandboxes/ https://docs.docker.com/ai/sandboxes/

SchemaLoad 2mo ago

Sandboxing seems like the obvious solution. These tools prompt me to review an absurd number of very complex bash commands where there is realistically no way to carefully review them. I just want to put the thing in a box with the code and let it run any number of commands on the code without prompting.

eru 2mo ago
You can actually use a hook to have a script review the (bash) commands for you.
- SchemaLoad 2mo ago
  This is still less safe and less convenient than sandboxing. I want them to be able to run whatever command they want inside the sandbox even if it's traditionally dangerous (overwrites files, etc) because it can't touch anything that matters and I can revert any changes to the code myself. If anything the only thing you'd have to have reviewed is sandbox escape attempts.
  - eru 2mo ago
    You are right. And the hook is for convenience, not for safety. Having explicit sandboxes is good, of course. But in addition I also treat my whole computer like a sandbox, it least in the sense that there's no files I would mind if they were overwritten or deleted: you should have backups anyway.

arvyy 2mo ago

same, and unlike other repliers, I'll say one doesn't need to reinvent a new tool for this. Just use devcontainers.

croemer 2mo ago
Same, I've also been running with `--dangerously-skip-permissions` in devcontainers with docker volumes to keep Claude/Codex auth tokens. Works really well!