Live data from Hacker News

Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

twitter.com

241–250 of 330 posts

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that docker will expose the ports to the host machine's network interfaces, which is a crucial difference. For my home server running docker that means exposed to the LAN, but not the WAN unless I add in a port forwarding rule on my router. Similarly in an enterprise environment you would be exposing the port on whatever VLAN the host is connected to, which hopefully doesn't have directly transit…

I was thinking along similar lines to what you've suggested here, but then I considered how many VPS might be configured by folks following some random web tutorial, to set up their LAMP stack (or whatever), that end up doing something like what was described.

A lot of those VPS instructions these days recommend a reverse proxy like Caddy or Traefik for that exact reason. I think it's also a valid argument to say that anyone playing around on a VPS without knowing what they're doing is probably going to learn some hard lessons, and that's kind of the point.

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wait so just being lazy and using sudo on Docker commands instead of figuring things out actually means I'm being safer? awesome.

This feels like using Docker is just inherently unsafe.

No, using AI tools not in an effective sandbox is inherently unsafe.

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#243
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of us don’t get a choice.

You can run plain old CLI Docker ( not Docker Desktop) from within WSL.

You can. Would it surprise you to know that this, too, is often locked down?

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#244
post #7

Every time I try to install Docker there's a warning that being in the "docker" group is equivalent to having root access. You should probably know about this workaround by now.

This is incredibly ironic considering it's a sandboxing technology

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#246
post #7

Every time I try to install Docker there's a warning that being in the "docker" group is equivalent to having root access. You should probably know about this workaround by now.

Most of us install Docker just to run a project locally, and is part of a long checklist of things to install. We can't expect everyone to be an expert on the hundreds of apps/tools/packages that get installed on a machine. It's like expected people to read, and understand, all the terms of service shoved in front of us on a daily basis.

> Most of us install Docker just to run a project locally

There's your mistake.

(Akshually using Docker is the real mistake, but that ship has sailed, no fixing these people now.)

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#247
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why adding your user account to the docker group is a separate step that explicitly does not happen as part of the installation: https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/linux-postinstall/ > Warning > The docker group grants root-level privileges to the user. For details on how this impacts security in your system, see Docker Daemon Attack Surface.

And containers were supposed to make things safer ... Huge design mistake if you ask me.

> And containers were supposed to make things safer ...

No. Containers are a slight improvement over the .tar.gz software distribution method we had a few decades ago.

(And I mean "slight" literally - a Docker container is just a .tar.gz with a bundled bash script that runs in a chroot.)

Re: Codex just found a "workaround" of not having sudo on my PC

#250
post #245

Wasn't it well-known that putting people in the docker group is basically the same as giving them root rights?

Was it really though? Yes, Docker has become so ubiquitous that you probably can't get a job as a dev anymore without knowing about it, but I wouldn't trust most users to know these specifics. At the very least it is probably less known than sudoer or SUID misconfiguration risk, and even those are not what I'd call "general knowledge" that everyone who uses it knows about.
Post reply on HN