Asklemmy

43402 readers

1421 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

253

What are some things that Linux can't do, but Windows can? (lemmy.zip)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

550 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (7 children)

The secured Sandbox maybe? The windows sandbox is pretty awesome for day to day use imo. And no a template VM or container isnt really the same thing. The sandbox has the task of making sure that there is nothing that can break out. Afaik the sanbox has done a pretty good job so far in that aspect. Does linux bring a comparable option to the table? Would love to find out, changig as many aspects of my life to linux is the best thing to do.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Flatpak and Snap are Linux packaging formats that have sandboxing implemented and it’s pretty solid. There’s also Firejail for running sketchy applications in a stronger sandbox

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

People really dislike it when you point this out, But the security model on Linux is lacking. Yes, we have things like apparmor and SELinux, but compare it to sandboxd on macOS. The windows sandbox isn’t perfect, but it’s really user-friendly, and it works in most cases. Linux doesn’t have a direct equivalent. We’ve made great strides with making immutable distros through things like flatpack, and snap, but something that they failed to do is implement a least privilege model that is as robust as sandboxd on macOS.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

From what I see, windows sandbox is literally a template VM.

https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-os-platform-blog/windows-sandbox/ba-p/301849

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Reall great article. Thanks for sharing. But I dont know where you get the "literally a template" idea from. The article is explaining pretty well how its made and there isn't one thing that leads to the assumption that this was just a template that gets booted up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It says in the article that windows sandbox is using a "base image". It boots up the image, you do stuff then close it, and the next time you boot it up it's the base image again. Is that not what a template VM would do?

The primary difference between a usual VM template and this is that it's small. "When installed the dynamic base package it occupies about 100MB disk space". That's because it's essentially mounting a bunch of the system files immutably. You could theoretically do the same on Linux, but it probably wouldn't be worth the effort.

Most of the advancements they have is under the hood stuff, like linking files instead of directly including them or managing memory. Battery state pass through and graphics OOTB is cool though, depending on your setup you might have to put in a bit of work to make that happen on Linux.