← Back to context Comment by bigyabai 14 hours ago [flagged] 2 comments bigyabai Reply mike_hearn 14 hours ago Bubblewrap isn't a sandboxing architecture, so no. Go look at how Apple designed the macOS/iOS security system and you'll see that a Bubblewrap like tool is only. small portion of it. bigyabai 14 hours ago Linux in-general is a small portion of the Darwin architecture. One is a monolithic kernel, the other has microkernel IPC security to consider.Are there any glaring limitations in Bubblewrap you'd like to point out, or are we having the Tannenbaum argument all over again?
mike_hearn 14 hours ago Bubblewrap isn't a sandboxing architecture, so no. Go look at how Apple designed the macOS/iOS security system and you'll see that a Bubblewrap like tool is only. small portion of it. bigyabai 14 hours ago Linux in-general is a small portion of the Darwin architecture. One is a monolithic kernel, the other has microkernel IPC security to consider.Are there any glaring limitations in Bubblewrap you'd like to point out, or are we having the Tannenbaum argument all over again?
bigyabai 14 hours ago Linux in-general is a small portion of the Darwin architecture. One is a monolithic kernel, the other has microkernel IPC security to consider.Are there any glaring limitations in Bubblewrap you'd like to point out, or are we having the Tannenbaum argument all over again?
Bubblewrap isn't a sandboxing architecture, so no. Go look at how Apple designed the macOS/iOS security system and you'll see that a Bubblewrap like tool is only. small portion of it.
Linux in-general is a small portion of the Darwin architecture. One is a monolithic kernel, the other has microkernel IPC security to consider.
Are there any glaring limitations in Bubblewrap you'd like to point out, or are we having the Tannenbaum argument all over again?