Skip to main content

Sandboxing OSX apps is a good start

The idea of sandboxing OSX apps is not new or unique. Both OSX and Windows have features that prevent software, particularly 3rd party apps, from accessing various physical and data resources but it's not without it's detractors most of which are just haters. What bothers me is that many in this verbal minority have an agenda whether it's selling more anti-virus services or their one of those users that does not care.

The reality is, however, system or computer security whether it's in the form of in-built firewalls, Little Snitch, or sandboxing has more to do with protecting the brand rather than user's data. One other side effect is going to be the cost of support.

(1) the first thing you'll notice whether you're installing software using the appstore or downloading directly from the vendor's website is that the app is being installed as a "shared" app which means that the user needed to be the administrator or have administrator access. And since the installer is built into the application which has been promoted to administrator could install much more than just the application. (think trojan horse)

(2) disk space is relatively cheap these days even though SSD is becoming more prevalent (and is more expensive than the mechanical alternative) prices are falling and it's still pretty efficient. So having multiple copies per user is not terrible.

(3) Sandboxing means that the user would install the app in their user folder(s) and that the app would only have access to it's own data. On the whole this is a good idea, specially if you're talking about something like quickbooks where the application's data could be encrypted either by the sandbox or the application.

(4) At some point, however, applications will need the ability to bridge sandboxes. It seems to me that bridging is a permissions thing that the kernel is ideally suited for.

What does all of this really mean for the user experience? On the one hand I believe that it's going to eliminate the biggest problem for most computer users; and that is the dreaded "you need to reinstall the operating system and all of your applications".

On the one hand sandboxing is meant to protect the operating system from the user applications. On the other hand it's also meant to prevent one application from accessing other applications for either innocent or nefarious reasons.


Popular posts from this blog

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

UPDATE 2017-10-30: With gratitude the CoreOS team has provided updated information on their pricing, however, I stand by my conclusion that the effective cost is lower when you deploy monster machines. The cost per node of my 1 CPU Intel NUC is the same as a 96 CPU server when you get beyond 10 nodes. I'll also reiterate that while my pricing notes are not currently…

eGalax touch on default Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS

I have not had success with the touch drivers as yet.  The touch works and evtest also seems to report events, however, I have noticed that the button click is not working and no matter what I do xinput refuses to configure the buttons correctly.  When I downgraded to ubuntu 10.04 LTS everything sort of worked... there must have been something in the kermel as 10.04 was in the 2.6 kernel and 4.04 is in the 3.x branch.

One thing ... all of the documentation pointed to the wrong website or one in Taiwanese. I was finally able to locate the drivers again: (it would have been nice if they provided the install instructions in text rather than PDF)
Please open the document "EETI_eGTouch_Programming_Guide" under the Guide directory, and follow the Guidline to install driver.
download the appropriate versionunzip the fileread the programming manual And from that I'm distilling to the following: execute the answer all of the questio…

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).


I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…