Live data from Hacker News

The browser is the sandbox

aifoc.us

51–60 of 202 posts

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#51
post #39

> a robust sandbox for agents to operate in I would like to humbly propose that we simply provision another computer for the agent to use. I don't know why this needs to be complicated. A nano EC2 instance is like $5/m. I suspect many of us currently have the means to do this on prem without resorting to virtualization.

An EC2 instance is a sandbox within a large server, so that's not really reframing the issue.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#52

I've found it interesting that systemd and Linux user permissions/groups never come into the sandboxing discussions. They're both quite robust, offer a good deal of customization in concert,and by their nature, are fairly low cost.

Linux kernel is ridden with local privilege escalation vulnerabilities. This approach works for trusted software that you just want to contain, but it won't work for malicious software.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#53

I've found it interesting that systemd and Linux user permissions/groups never come into the sandboxing discussions. They're both quite robust, offer a good deal of customization in concert,and by their nature, are fairly low cost.

Unix permissions were written at a time where the (multi user) system was protecting itself from the user. Every program ran at the same privileges of the user, because it wasn't a security consideration that maybe the program doesn't do what the user thinks it does. That's why in the list of classic Unix tools there is nothing to sandbox programs or anything like that, it was a non issue And today this is.. not suff…

I feel like apparmor is getting there, very, very slowly. Just need every package to come with a declarative profile or fallback to a strict default profile.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#54
post #37

We never say that it isn't. There is a reason Google developed NaCl in the first place that inspired WebAssembly to become the ultimate sandbox standard. Not only that, DOM, JS and CSS also serves as a sandbox of rendering standard, and the capability based design is also seen throughout many browsers even starting with the Netscape Navigator. Locking down features to have a unified experience is what a browser shoul…

> Sidenote: Flash's scripting language, ActionScript is also directly responsible for the generational design of Java-ahem-ECMAScript later on, also TypeScript too. I feel like I am the only one who absolutely loved ActionScript, especially AS3. I wrote a video aggregator (chime.tv[1]) back in the day using AS3 and it was such a fun experience. 1. https://techcrunch.com/2007/06/12/chimetv-a-prettier-way-to-...

How did you got that impression?

There is the universal hate for flash because it was used for ads and had shitty security, but anyone I know who actually used AS3 loved it.

At its peak, with flex builder, we also had a full blown UI Editor, where you could just add your own custom elements designed directly with flash ... and then it was all killed because Apple did not dare to open source it, or put serious efforts on their own into improving the technical base of the flash player (that had aquired lots of technical dept).

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#56
I'd like to point Simon and others to 2 more things possible in the browser:

1) webcontainer allows nodejs frontend and backend apps to be run in the browser. this is readily demonstrated to (now sadly unmaintained) bolt.diy project.

2) jslinux and x86 linux examples allow running of complete linux env in wasm, and 2 way communication. A thin extension adds networking support to Linux.

so technically it's theoretically possible to run a pretty full fledged agentic system with the simple UX of visiting a URL.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#57
It's fascinating that browsers are one of the most robust and widely available sandboxing system and we are yet to make a claude-code/gemini-cli like agent that runs inside the browser.

Browsers as agent environment opens up a ton of exciting possibilities. For example, agents now have an instant way to offer UIs based on tech governed by standards(HTML/CSS) instead of platform specific UI bindings. A way to run third party code safely in wasm containers. A way to store information in disk with enough confidence that it won't explode the user's disk drive. All this basically for free.

My bet is that eventually we'll end up with a powerful agentic tool that uses the browser environment to plan and execute personal agents or to deploy business agents that doesn't access system resources any more than browsers do at the moment.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#58

I've found it interesting that systemd and Linux user permissions/groups never come into the sandboxing discussions. They're both quite robust, offer a good deal of customization in concert,and by their nature, are fairly low cost.

Linux kernel is ridden with local privilege escalation vulnerabilities. This approach works for trusted software that you just want to contain, but it won't work for malicious software.

Ridden? There are issues from time to time, but it's not like you can grab the latest, patched Ubuntu LTS and escalate from an unprivileged seccomp sandbox that doesn't include crazy device files.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#59

I'd like to point Simon and others to 2 more things possible in the browser: 1) webcontainer allows nodejs frontend and backend apps to be run in the browser. this is readily demonstrated to (now sadly unmaintained) bolt.diy project. 2) jslinux and x86 linux examples allow running of complete linux env in wasm, and 2 way communication. A thin extension adds networking support to Linux. so technically it's theoretical…

I have a very minimal v86 experiment here: https://tools.simonwillison.net/v86

My eventual goal with that is to expand it so an LLM can treat it like a filesystem and execution environment and do Claude Code style tricks with it, but it's not particularly easy to programmatically run shell commands via v86 - it seems to be designed more for presenting a Linux environment in an interactive UI in a browser.

It's likely I've not found the right way to run it yet though.

Re: The browser is the sandbox

#60

I've found it interesting that systemd and Linux user permissions/groups never come into the sandboxing discussions. They're both quite robust, offer a good deal of customization in concert,and by their nature, are fairly low cost.

Agreed! systemd nspawn is actually pretty awesome, though not many people use it.
Post reply on HN