Re: why not a sandbox

[Marius <wishinet () googlemail com>]

Am 05.09.09 04:28, schrieb Fatherlaptop:
> ok. that's cool. not sure about enterprise compatibility or my English  
> but will check it out. my other option is front end. Lately, we have  
> ha "lots" of drive by infections. I have though "trained" users and  
> get calls on the "fake alert" box.
>
> It's a 3GS iPhone Thang!
>
> On Sep 4, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Kurth Bemis <kurth.bemis () gmail com> wrote:
>
> > Check out:
> >
> > http://www.sandboxie.com/
> > http://www.xenocode.com/Browsers/
> >
> > ~k
> >
> > On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 13:05 -0500, RandallM wrote:
> > > how come we just can't sandbox the browser in away from the system.
> > > its the users that just get gmail and click links, watch youtube vids
> > > and check FaceBook and Mypace that infect the network!

Actually Chrome for example comes with a sandbox security model.
Nevertheless it's the same old situation: root is chroot is still root.
Data-loss in a sandbox is still data-loss.

-- 
Marius
crazylazy.info

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/