borgmatic VS firejail

- for important files, a separate box where I have borgmatic [1] in deduplication mode installed; this is updated once in a while

Just curious: Do you have any reason to believe that such a data corruption bug is likely in ZFS? It seems like saying that ext4 could have a bug and you should also store stuff on NTFS, just in case (which I think does not make sense..).

[1]: https://github.com/borgmatic-collective/borgmatic

Not really dumb. I do use them too but with Borgbackup on the top (since they support it natively).

I found Borgmatic ( https://torsion.org/borgmatic/ ) to be the best way to run my backups. It takes care of everything from pruning to verifying the checksum etc... and it integrates with some monitoring (like cronitor).

So Borgmatic + rsync.net is the best combo

For backups I use Borg myself. If you need a GUI, you can use Vorta or Pika. With borgmatic, there is also a wrapper that extends the range of functions of Borg.

Furthermore, Borgmatic is a wrapper for Borg that extends or improves the range of functions.

For those of you not familiar, borgmatic is a very convenient tool which runs as a wrapper around borg.

I recommend Borg and Borgmatic. Automated, easy to setup, capable of notifying you if anything happens, deduplication and compression makes backups smaller, etc.

To add to this, Borg backup can be a little daunting to configure. There is a wrapper script called Borgmatic that distills it down to a single yaml config file. There are also some cloud hosts like BorgBase and rsync.net with native Borg support.

bubblewrap is designed as a low-level too. There is nothing quick and dirty about it. It disallows everything by default and you have to be explicit about what you want to share with the host. If your application needs complex permissions/resources, then you will need to have a complex bubblewrap command line.

Once you have figured out which permissions/resources you need for a given program, you can wrap the command line invocation in a shell script.

If you want other people to do the work of defining permissions/resources, then have a look at firejail: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail

Firejail is cool: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail

Linux namespaces/cgroups but nowhere near as heavy as Docker.

I use it when I want to limit the memory of a Python script:

```

Firejail can also be a useful option, though no good if you're on Mac https://firejail.wordpress.com/

Uses the same Linux primitives as docker etc, but can be a bit more ergonomic for this use case

Firejail, Flatpak (which uses Bubblewrap under the hood), and Snap (which uses AppArmor) all use the same underlying technology: Linux namespaces.

This question comes up a lot, and has been answered here: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/wiki/Frequently-Asked-...

TL;DR: Firejail has much more comprehensive features than Flatpak (Bubblewrap). Firejail also has more comprehensive network support, support for AppArmor and SELinux, and easier seccomp filtering.

Compared to Snap (which uses AppArmor), Firejail is compatible with AppArmor and again goes above and beyond with a lot of additional features.

Wonderful little tool, too bad you must chain various exec calling tools to get cgroups (a bit akin to `ionice ... nice ... cmd`) and Linux users namespaces can't allow UNIX sockets while preventing network access (I think?).

Migrated from Firejail when its complexity annoyed me too much and I hit https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/3001 (Firejail doesn't like parens or brackets in --put/--get parameters) to a badly NIH version using bwrap and bash to have "profiles":

Firejail does this. The profile database is the two "profile" directories in https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/tree/master/etc

What do you mean by a Firefox container? Do you mean FireJail?