Debian 13:

$ uname -r
6.12.88+deb13-amd64

$ snap debug sandbox-features|grep confinement
confinement-options:  classic devmode

$ snap debug confinement
partial

$ aa-enabled
Yes

Ubuntu (24.04):

$ uname -r
6.8.0-117-generic

$ snap debug sandbox-features|grep confinement
confinement-options:  classic devmode strict

$ snap debug confinement
strict

$ aa-enabled
Yes

What does this mean, you ask? Well, basically every Snap package you thought was running isolated in it’s own little sandbox were running unconfined the whole time. The prorpietary app you removed the :home connection from, so it wouldn’t be able to access your home directory? Well, it could have exfiltrated all our private files in the meantime.

How is this not a bigger deal and how are Snaps ever to become mainstream when even today, more than 10 years after the introduction of snaps, you can’t run them sandboxed on a huge portion of Linux distros?

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
    49·
    1 day ago

    If I had to guess, this isn’t a bigger issue because Snap is mostly pushed by Canonical. And in a bit of a weird way (proprietary backend, exclusive apps) so… reception in the rest of the Linux community is …mixed. To put it charitably. It’s probably not that relevant for most people outside of the Ubuntu ecosystem. And probably also not a priority for Canonical or the proprietary software vendors.

      • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
        17·
        1 day ago

        It may not be wise to use a Snap without first understanding the reputation/limitations of Snap.

        seems the Debian Wiki has pretty much your take on it 😅

        • mecen@lemmy.ca
          7·
          20 hours ago

          “Important note: Many users are wary of Snaps. Use at your own discretion. They update on their own schedule, and install files to nonstandard locations. It may not be wise to use a Snap without first understanding the reputation/limitations of Snap.”

          • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
            3·
            20 hours ago

            Yeah. And I’d say with the SELinux problems and with what OP wrote, the security model including things like a failure mode to fall open, …silently… There’s more things to be wary of, than what they wrote in those 4 sentences.