[heavyset_go]

You can have sandboxing and run whatever you want. I do it every day on PCs where I, the user, can define the terms of sandboxing any appliclation I want, and not a trillion dollar corporation using sandboxes to enforce their chosen revenue streams upon users.

[raw_anon_1111]

Yes and for you to think that is a valid argument for a consumer product is why most open source products suck for consumers and end up being about as bad as the “homermobile”.

[heavyset_go]

You do realize macOS has used sandboxing by default for over a decade, right?

ChromeOS/ChromiumOS uses heavy sandboxing. Android currently uses sandboxing transparently, despite plans to iOS-ify the platform. Hell, Windows uses app isolation sandboxing these days.

All four consumer platforms let you run the software you want to and they provide sandboxing at the same time. They also let you configure sandboxes, too.

As for open source, consumer products like the Steam Deck use sandboxes, popular game launchers like Lutris use sandboxes, Firefox transparently uses sandboxing by default, as does Chromium/Chrome, anything installed automatically with Flatpak or Snap are sandboxed by default and AppArmor/SELinux works in the background automatically on most distros and are activated by default.

Saying open source projects like the Steam Deck, Firefox, Chromium, ChromiumOS and Android suck for consumers is a weird opinion, but you're free to have it.

[raw_anon_1111]

Mac apps outside of the Mac App Store really doesn’t have any sandboxing.

And Android’s sandboxing is so bad, you always hear about the malware of the week especially outside of the Play Store.

ChromeOS also isn’t open source. And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one.

Firefox is s browser, and didn’t they tighten what third party extensions can run?

Android - or at least the version that most people use - is not “open source” by any stretch of the imagination.

[heavyset_go]

> Mac apps outside of the Mac App Store really doesn’t have any sandboxing.

Apps can and do ship with sandboxing rules that will be applied at runtime.

> ChromeOS also isn’t open source. And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one.

I listed ChromeOS as one of four consumer operating systems used by billions of people that uses sandboxing, not as an open source OS.

Notice how I did use ChromiumOS when referring to open source software, along with Chromium.

> And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one.

Who said anything about expecting users to do that? I just mentioned that you could configure them if you wanted to, like I said in my GP.

Again, my point is that these are consumer products that billions of people use everyday that use sandboxing by default, yet somehow not even having to think about sandboxing is too onerous for end users?

> Firefox is s browser, and didn’t they tighten what third party extensions can run?

Yes, it is open source consumer software that does sandboxing by default without the user having to think about it.

> Android - or at least the version that most people use - is not “open source” by any stretch of the imagination.

AOSP is very much open source

[raw_anon_1111]

> Apps can and do ship with sandboxing rules that will be applied at runtime.

Hardly any apps outside of the Mac App Store voluntarily opt in for sandboxing

> I listed ChromeOS as one of four consumer operating systems used by billions of people that uses sandboxing, not as an open source OS.

And also locked down…

> AOSP is very much open source

Calling AOSP open source when it’s almost useless to most consumers without the proprietary bits from Google is just as disingenuous as calling iOS open source because Darwin is open source.