zlacker

>>natebc+(OP)
I am running a lot of tools inside sandbox now for exactly this reason. The damage is confined to the directory I'm running that tool in.

There is no reason for a tool to implicitly access my mounted cloud drive directory and browser cookies data.

>>ashish+q9
MacOS has been getting a lot of flak recently for (correct) UI reasons, but I honestly feel like they're the closest to the money with granular app permissions.

Linux people are very resistant to this, but the future is going to be sandboxed iOS style apps. Not because OS vendors want to control what apps do, but because users do. If the FOSS community continues to ignore proper security sandboxing and distribution of end user applications, then it will just end up entirely centralised in one of the big tech companies, as it already is on iOS and macOS by Apple.

>>troad+9b
> Linux people are very resistant to this, but the future is going to be sandboxed iOS style apps.

Linux people are NOT resistant to this. Atomic desktops are picking up momentum and people are screaming for it. Snaps, flatpaks, appimages, etc. are all moving in that direction.

As for plain development, sadly, the OS developers are simply ignoring the people asking. See:

https://github.com/containers/toolbox/issues/183

https://github.com/containers/toolbox/issues/348

https://github.com/containers/toolbox/issues/1470

I'll leave it up to you to speculate why.

Perhaps getting a bit of black eye and some negative attention from the Great Orange Website(tm) can light a fire under some folks.