Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we need is a capabilities based security system. It could write all the python, asm, whatever it wants and it wouldn't matter at all if it was never given a reference to use something it shouldn't.
Docker is enough in practice no?
Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
331–340 of 374 posts
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#332Add this to .claude/settings.json: { "sandbox": { "enabled": true, "filesystem": { "allowRead": ["."], "denyRead": ["~/"], "allowWrite": ["."], "denyWrite": ["/"] } } } You can change the read part if you're ok with it reading outside. This feature was only added 10 days ago fwiw but it's great and pretty much this.
Battle hardened tools for this have existed for decades, we don't need new ones. Just run claude as a user without access to those directories, that way the containment is inherited by subprocesses.
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#333From the home page: > Stop trusting blindly > One-line installer scripts, Here are the manual install instructions from the "Install / Build page: > curl -L https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/snapshot/jai.tar.gz | tar xzf - > cd jai > makepkg -i So, trust their jai tool, but not _other_ installer scripts?
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#334Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#335I am still amazed that people so easily accepted installing these agents on private machines. We've been securing our systems in all ways possible for decades and then one day just said: oh hello unpredictable, unreliable, Turing-complete software that can exfiltrate and corrupt data in infinite unknown ways -- here's the keys, go wild.
People were also dismissing concerns about build tooling automatically pulling in an entire swarm of dependencies and now here we are in the middle of a repetitive string of high profile developer supply chain compromises. Short term thinking seems to dominate even groups of people that are objectively smarter and better educated than average.
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#336Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#337Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion Claude should be shipped by a custom implementation of "rm" that Anthropic can add guardrails to. Same with "find" surprised they don't just embed ripgrep (what VS Code does). It's really surprising they don't just tweak what Claude uses and lock it down to where it cannot be harmful. Ensure it only ever calls tooling Claude Code provides.
Oh, rm failed, since we're running in a weird environment! Let me retry with `bash -c "/usr/bin/rm -rf *"`!
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t dangerously skip permissions and actually read commands when you get prompted and you’re fine.
Yeah, I actually have both an alias for `rm` and a custom seatbelt sandbox which means the agent can only delete stuff within the directory it’s working in, so wasn’t an issue, was just fun to watch it say “hm, that doesn’t seem to work. Looks like the user has aliased rm. I’ll just go ahead and work around it”
Re: Go hard on agents, not on your filesystem
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've yet to be saved by an airbag or seatbelt. Is that justification to stop using them? How near a miss must we have (and how many) before you would feel that certain practices surrounding dependencies are inadvisable? A number of these supply chain compromises had incredibly high stakes and were seemingly only noticed before paying off by lucky coincidence.
> I've yet to be saved by an airbag or seatbelt. Is that justification to stop using them? By now, getting a car without airbags would probably be more costly if possible, and the seatbelt takes 2s every time you're in a car, which is not nothing but is still very little. In comparison, analyzing all the dependencies of a software project, vetting them individually or having less of them can require days of efforts w…