Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Do you mean you don't trust it? Because they do describe its sandboxing as a security feature.



flatpak or firejail would have protected you from this vulnerability, not sure what they're on about here. They are 100% proof against everything of course.


The firefox flatpak has write access to your home directory. So it can simply edit your bashrc even if there are no more direct escapes, no?


Firefox Flatpak has neither write or read permission to your home directory. At least that's my take from browsing file:///home/myuser. If you try to open or save a file using the native dialogs, you do grant the appropriate permission on demand, but that's using the xdg portal, outside the app scope, specifically designed for this.


it's easy for something with arbitrary code execution to escape the sandboxing. https://hanako.codeberg.page/


I couldn't reproduce the tty example, but it might as well be a mistake on my side. Other than this, the sandboxing spec itself is as safe as I'd expect. I reckon that Wayland applications not packaged to require $HOME access or some dbus services are not known to escape the sandbox. This seems to be the case of Firefox, afaict.


repeated myself somehow




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: