Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Windows Sandbox

techcommunity.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 328 posts

Re: Windows Sandbox

#81

Post by saagarjha »

Garbage wrote: post #66
neotek wrote: post #38

Only Microsoft would come up with a new security feature and then intentionally and arbitrarily limit its availability to the most expensive version of their OS. This is the same company that thinks putting ads in the fucking file explorer is appropriate on an OS they charge hundreds and hundreds of dollars for.

I believe it's because the virtualization support is only limited to those versions. I might be wrong though.

Isn’t this basically a virtual machine, though? I don’t see anything special that you’d need a more expensive version of Windows for. This should be using your processor’s virtualization capabilities, right?

Re: Windows Sandbox

#83

Post by coder543 »

cm2187 wrote: post #71
coder543 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that's not the only alternative... some others include a Chromebook, an iPad, a MacBook, or even installing a Linux distro and setting it up for them such that they don't need to use the CLI to accomplish the things they want to do. But honestly, my opinion is that Windows 10 is not as fragile as earlier versions of Windows were.

If the parents' problem is that they install random software, that's not going to help them. I have seen MacBooks with twenty spyware browser extensions.

I really doubt that, but I can't easily argue with an anecdote, so sure. It happened, probably 15 years ago.

Windows was famous for tons of installers bundling toolbars, but that's never been an epidemic on Mac.

These days, Macs will not install unsigned software by default, and you can lock that down to App Store only with a single setting change, so they're certainly not getting bundled malicious toolbars from installing software... since distributing malware is a quick way to get your developer signature revoked, and you're certainly not going to be installing toolbars from the App Store sandbox.

That leaves manually installing malicious toolbars through the official extension store for whatever browser they use. All extension stores do their best to weed out malicious extensions these days, and it takes intentional effort to install extensions. It doesn't just happen while you're trying to do other things.

Obviously, toolbars don't even exist on iPads, and software installers bundling random malware is obviously not a huge concern on Chromebooks. A MacBook was not at the front of my list, so I don't know why you chose to singularly attack that option. Maybe you thought it was the easiest target?

Re: Windows Sandbox

#84

Post by ToFab123 »

lionpixel wrote: post #56
neotek wrote: post #38

Only Microsoft would come up with a new security feature and then intentionally and arbitrarily limit its availability to the most expensive version of their OS. This is the same company that thinks putting ads in the fucking file explorer is appropriate on an OS they charge hundreds and hundreds of dollars for.

I paid 13€ for an Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM key. I thought everyone is doing this as well?

I use a windows 8 retail key

Re: Windows Sandbox

#85

Post by finchisko »

terhechte wrote: post #74
finchisko wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On macOS some protection was added, so apps cannot write to system protected directories. But I was talking about all files that app creates. Like files in home dir (eg. ~/Library). If you remove the app, those files stay there and occupy space. The only way you can partly clean up the mess, is to delete home dir from time to time (but backup important files first). Even then, there might still be files in /usr/local…

A macOS app installed from the app store can only write to ~/Library/Containers/name.of.app.bundle. Those are not automatically trashed (as far as I know), but it is much easier to clean than the whole ~/Library. Actually, if all your apps are in /Applications it would be easy to write a small script that deletes everything in Containers that's a: not from Apple and b: doesn't have a app bundle identifier in /Applica…

TBH I didn't know about that. Probably same situation is with Windows UWP apps installed from store (but there is special permission to grant access to whole fs, which allow app write outside it's sandbox dir). Anyway there are so many apps that are not installed from app stores. IMO having proper sandbox is still a thing in 2018.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#86

Post by JaRail »

ToFab123 wrote: post #15
fuzzy2 wrote: post #10

Based on Hyper-V? Bummer. I use VMware Workstation at work and that’s not going to change.

I could but I won't. What keeps me on VMware if that I can easily expand the vm to use 1 or more monitors. I am not sure if hyperv handles resizing of the window as smooth as VMware the adjust the display settings in the client. Last time i checked hyperv (rdp) just gave me scrollbars. It is probably antitrust concerns that is the reason why Microsoft never has improved the RDP client.

I haven't used HyperV in a while. I rarely connected to VMs via the hyperv console, just for installations or cases where windows wasn't booting properly. I use MSTSC (MS Terminal Services Client). That has supported multimonitor for the 12 or so years I've used it.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#87

Post by saagarjha »

terhechte wrote: post #74
finchisko wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On macOS some protection was added, so apps cannot write to system protected directories. But I was talking about all files that app creates. Like files in home dir (eg. ~/Library). If you remove the app, those files stay there and occupy space. The only way you can partly clean up the mess, is to delete home dir from time to time (but backup important files first). Even then, there might still be files in /usr/local…

A macOS app installed from the app store can only write to ~/Library/Containers/name.of.app.bundle. Those are not automatically trashed (as far as I know), but it is much easier to clean than the whole ~/Library. Actually, if all your apps are in /Applications it would be easy to write a small script that deletes everything in Containers that's a: not from Apple and b: doesn't have a app bundle identifier in /Applica…

And there are in fact “app cleaners” that do exactly this.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#88

Post by cm2187 »

coder543 wrote: post #83
cm2187 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the parents' problem is that they install random software, that's not going to help them. I have seen MacBooks with twenty spyware browser extensions.

I really doubt that, but I can't easily argue with an anecdote, so sure. It happened, probably 15 years ago. Windows was famous for tons of installers bundling toolbars, but that's never been an epidemic on Mac. These days, Macs will not install unsigned software by default, and you can lock that down to App Store only with a single setting change, so they're certainly not getting bundled malicious toolbars from inst…

But I don't think "it just happens" on windows either (outside of OEM crapware, which granted is pure dirt). Most of the time it is unsophisticated users led to click and install things themselves. An application signature won't help.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#89

Post by saagarjha »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #62

This is pretty cool, I know where I'm going to run my browser from now on :-).

In case that wasn’t sarcasm: you probably don’t want to run your browser in this, since it already has a sandbox and you’ll have a measurable performance penalty by running in a virtual machine.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#90

Post by TeMPOraL »

coder543 wrote: post #63
cm2187 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like get them to learn a lot of linux command lines?

I'm pretty sure that's not the only alternative... some others include a Chromebook, an iPad, a MacBook, or even installing a Linux distro and setting it up for them such that they don't need to use the CLI to accomplish the things they want to do. But honestly, my opinion is that Windows 10 is not as fragile as earlier versions of Windows were.

> some others include a Chromebook,

I.e. a web browser with a keyboard.

> an iPad

I.e. a content consumption tool, not a general-purpose computer.

> a MacBook

Fine if you can afford it.

> or even installing a Linux distro and setting it up for them such that they don't need to use the CLI to accomplish the things they want to do.

That's... possible, but tough. As someone who switched from Windows to Linux many years ago, I still see every distribution to be "leaking" the fact that it's a CLI-oriented ecosystem. They do that that especially when someone goes wrong.

All are valid alternatives if you carefully consider your parents' needs and discover they're extremely limited. But Windows would still be my first, default choice - because of a combination of its design and history, it's the cheapest commercial system that still lets you own your computing experience, and run professional software.

Post reply on HN