|
|
|
|
|
by vezzy-fnord
4020 days ago
|
|
The expression "non-C OS that can run Docker containers" reeks of magical thinking through and through, but for what it's worth the purpose of Docker is application containerization, which is more concerned with logical resource partitioning, infrastructure granularity and an escape from the broader state-related issues of the shared library context in the host OS. Sandboxing is orthogonal. It so happens that some of the techniques of OS-level virtualization overlap with those of sandboxing on Linux, but Docker is nonetheless not a security tool. Not that Docker's current libcontainer work is even at all portable. It's questionable what the current ruckus about companies backing the Open Container Project will lead to. I'll let Theo take it from here: "You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes." |
|
Right people, right tools, right architecture, and right processes for knocking out defects. That's what it takes. Virtualization's well-studied enough to tackle it. Only one's trying in FOSS that I'm aware of are L4 community: esp TU Dresden Nizza architecture w/ L4 Linux, OK Labs OKL4/seL4 / OK Linux, and GenodeOS on Nova microhypervisor or OKL4. Google separation kernel, Nizza and Genode architectures to see what I mean.