distrobuilder VS platform-compat

LXC

which is what docker/podman/containerd use. If you want full system emulation look into LXC/LXD.

LXD is a manager for Linux Containers (LXC), which lets me spin up a kind-of lightweight VM for any distro, instantly. I use it to run proprietary software isolated from the rest of my system (such as Steam); disposable environments for trying stuff out, and running software that doesn't jive well with Nixos.

Check this thread on linuxcontainers LXD forum. Half way down Simos points to the eventual solution:

I found this website https://linuxcontainers.org/ and I am going to test that out for server just to see how it works.

Up to now the best documentation I have come across is the official one at linuxcontainers.org.

Containers, like LXC or Docker.

After five years managing physical servers, then another four years working with VM clusters, the value of Linux Containers(LXC) and their eventual productization as Docker appealed to me.

Docker introduced container images to the technology world, making container images a standardized delivery unit. In fact, before Docker, containerization technology already existed. Let's talk about a more recent technology, LXC (Linux Containers) in 2008. Compared to Docker, LXC is less popular since Docker provides container images, which can be more standardized and more convenient to migrate. Also, Docker created the DockerHub public service, which has become the world's largest container image repository. In addition, containerization technology can also achieve a certain degree of resource isolation, including not only CPU, memory, and other resources isolation, but also network stack isolation, which makes it easier to deploy multiple copies of applications on the same machine.

DotNet offers the SecureString class to keep a string encrypted in Memory, but as long as the OS does not natively support this concept, the only advantage is that it resides in memory for a shorter time, the disadvantage is that SecureStrings are easier to search for.

Note the KeePass's resistance to the attack mentioned depends on the security of .NET's secure string, which, here's what Microsoft has to say about it (https://github.com/dotnet/platform-compat/blob/master/docs/D...)

As for KeePassXC, last I checked it didn't even bother.

TIL. Looks like the deprecation note recommends MailKit.

Well of course, but it does have to be passed to the module that generates the hashes AD uses in the first place. And as I said, the standard password reset screen is bound to store the password in plain text somewhere as well.

This won’t help you with your question, but I figured I should warn against using send-mailmessage.

points you here.

Some of the reasons for not using Hashtable or other non-generic collection types are outlined here. That's why Microsoft doesn't recommend their usage in new implementations across all of its API documentation.

And if you really want to be secure you need to something better than a SecureString: https://github.com/dotnet/platform-compat/blob/master/docs/DE0001.md