Live data from Hacker News

Docker Sandboxes – Disposable, isolated sandboxes for AI agents

docker.com

431–433 of 433 posts

Re: Docker Sandboxes – Disposable, isolated sandboxes for AI agents

#431
So what "sandboxing" does this add that is not already present in Docker, and how can users be any more assured that software cannot break out (which has happened at times with Docker).

Can a user blindly trust this sandbox, because that's how people will treat it based on the marketing. Sounds like it could be useful for far more than just AI though.

Re: Docker Sandboxes – Disposable, isolated sandboxes for AI agents

#432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“microvms” are real vms but the hypervisor and vm (guest kernel) shed most of the hardware / device emulation, support, and discovery which makes traditional VMs look / feel like real computers, as well as most guest interactions. This gives them extremely low overhead. Firecracker is designed to start a VM in under 125ms and 5MB. Netbsd advertises that you can direct-boot a MICROVM kernel configuration in under 10ms…

If an agent fires up NPM, takes a boatload of memory, is that memory released back to the OS after NPM shuts down in the VM?

> If an agent fires up NPM... :D :D

I think this is one of the big issues with today's MCP servers. Most are based on Node.js and take a lot more memory than they should, compared to the complexity that the job requires. Just run a few MCP servers locally, and all your RAM is gone...

Re: Docker Sandboxes – Disposable, isolated sandboxes for AI agents

#433
post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I've worked with people who have run into issues with "security" solutions like ZScaler. I have tried it with some APIs (like GitHub) and it does work. Not to say it will work in your case.

I was just interested how it works, because above it was sold as “it works”, when in reality, “it works*”.

Isn't it that way with most software? "It works", except when it doesn't.
Post reply on HN