zlacker

[return to "A story on home server security"]
1. joshgh+B3[view] [source] 2025-01-05 13:26:41
>>todsac+(OP)
Despite people slating the author, I think this is a reasonable oversight. On the surface, spinning up a Postgres instance in Docker seems secure because it’s contained. I know many articles claim “Docker= Secure”.

Whilst easy to point to common sense needed, perhaps we need to have better defaults. In this case, the Postgres images should only permit the cli, and nothing else.

◧◩
2. lopken+b7[view] [source] 2025-01-05 14:09:25
>>joshgh+B3
> spinning up a Postgres instance in Docker seems secure because it’s contained

This doesn't make any sense. Running something in a container doesn't magically make it "secure." Where does this misconception come from?

◧◩◪
3. diggan+8n[view] [source] 2025-01-05 16:22:08
>>lopken+b7
> Where does this misconception come from?

When docker first appeared, a lot of people explaining docker to others said something along the lines "It's like a fast VM you can create with a Dockerfile", leading a bunch of people to believe it's actually not just another process + some more stuff, but instead an actual barrier between host/guest like in a proper VM.

I remember talking about this a lot when explaining docker to people in the beginning, and how they shouldn't use it for isolation, but now after more than a decade with that misconception still being popular, I've lost energy about it...

[go to top]