firejail VS flatpak

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?

Hopping from one distro to another with a different package manager might require some time to adapt. Using a package manager that can be installed on most distro is one way to help you get to work faster. Flatpak is one of them; other alternative are Snap, Nix or Homebrew. Flatpak is a good starter, and if you have a bunch of free time, I suggest trying Nix.

No, it looks like you have to do it on an application basis.

https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/2913

Flatpak

> CLI tools do not implement auto-complete themselves. What you are seeing are auto-complete scripts for your shell that make network connections.

nit: This is incorrect. Robust auto-complete scripts call the actual program to provide completions.

That is what Flatpak does. It is Flatpak itself that makes the network connections.

https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/blob/main/completion/flat...

Not that it would make any differencen if it was implemented in Bash seeing as the Bash script is also provided by Flatpak.

The only performance impact I know of is with the seccomp filter in CPU-bound tasks: https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/4187

Skimming through the recent comments, there might be a way to optimize some of it.