Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by faho 2966 days ago
But this particular issue doesn't have anything to do with X!
1 comments

One word: lxc
And the explanation for that word?

It's still nothing to do with X, and it's not certain that it would plug the "hole" that is being used here.

This "exploit" requires unfettered (or at least not completely throttled) access to the CPU and a way to send the spoils home via the network.

Would this actually be stopped with "lxc"? I doubt it'd do much to curb the CPU abuse, and network access is something games frequently demand (in something like this for e.g. leaderboards or a social sharing feature), so I'd bet that nobody would bat an eye.

Sorry, missplaced my answer. It was regarding the guy above yours concerning apps in general can create havoc to a system. I mean that using containers like lxc can create a sandbox.
Containers under linux aren't in themselves very secure at all. This isn't inherently so. Supposedly solaris can do much better for example.
What security guarantees cannot be hold by container technologies such as LXC, cgroups, namespaces and docker?