zypak VS iproute2

Yes, it's fixed by not using the native sandbox entirely, and using a much weaker Flatpak's sandbox instead through zypak, thus not recommended and not officially supported.

Flatpak version seems to be working fine, but it's not officially supported. Also, the Flatpak version runs without Chromium sandbox through zypak, instead it runs with a much weaker Flatpak sandbox. I won't recommend anyone to run Chromium based browser through Flatpak.

Most chromium based browsers and apps use zypak when runnung as a Flatpak so how is it more insecure ?

Although the other commenter gave a great reply, I want to add: once I actually tried this to make Electron use the portals, and it just didn't work out:

BTW, it is currently not possible to flatpak mullvad-daemon, because it requires sudo permission and install systemd services. Flatpaking the GUI is also hard, because it uses chrome-sandbox and zypak(https://github.com/refi64/zypak) doesn't work because of segfault.

In electron package.json we have an option to add this modules "makers": [ { "name": "@electron-forge/maker-flatpak", "config": { "name": "OpenSpeedTest_Server", "options": { "categories": [ "Utility" ], "icon": { "512x512": "src/android-chrome-512x512.png" } }, "modules": [ { "name": "zypak", "sources": [ { "type": "git", "url": "https://github.com/refi64/zypak", "tag": "v2021.02" } ] }, { "name": "iproute2", "make-install-args": [ "PREFIX=/app", "CONFDIR=/app/share/iproute2", "SBINDIR=/app/bin" ], "sources": [ { "type": "archive", "url": "https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/net/iproute2/iproute2-5.7.0.tar.xz", "sha256": "725dc7ba94aae54c6f8d4223ca055d9fb4fe89d6994b1c03bfb4411c4dd10f21" } ], "cleanup": [ "/include", "/share/bash-completion", "/share/man" ] } ] } },

If it's not clear from (1.), please distribute Edge officially as Flatpak app via Flathub. Use this chance that you have a generic distro-decoupled runtime to provide aarch64 builds. The issue is reported here.