Selfhosted

40359 readers

431 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

167

PSA: Update your docker installation. Leaky Vessels flaws allow hackers to escape Docker, runc containers (www.bleepingcomputer.com)

submitted 9 months ago by redcalcium@lemmy.institute to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Snyk team has found four vulnerabilities collectively called "Leaky Vessels" that impact the runc and Buildkit container infrastructure and build tools, potentially allowing attackers to perform container escape on various software products.

On January 31, 2024, Buildkit fixed the flaws with version 0.12.5, and runc addressed the security issue impacting it on version 1.1.12.

Docker released version 4.27.0 on the same day, incorporating the secured versions of the components in its Moby engine, with versions 25.0.1 and 24.0.8.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago

If you are relying on Docker as a security boundary you are making a mistake.

Docker isolation is good enough to keep honest people honest but isn't good enough to keep out malicious actors. The Linux kernel API is simply too large of an attack surface to be highly secure.

If you want to run completely untrusted software you want a VM boundary at a very minimum. Ideally run it on completely separate hardware. There are few exceptions like browser isolation and gVisor which are strong software isolation without a VM but docker or any Linux container runner is not on that list. If the software has direct access to the host kernel it shouldn't be considered secure.