-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37.8k
Remove the syscall sandbox #27896
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove the syscall sandbox #27896
Conversation
After initially being merged in bitcoin#20487, it's no-longer clear that an internal syscall sandboxing mechanism is something that Bitcoin Core should have/maintain, especially when compared to better maintained/supported alterantives, i.e firejail. Note that given where it's used, the sandbox also gets dragged into the kernel. There is some related discussion in bitcoin#24771. This should not require any sort of deprecation, as this was only ever an opt-in, experimental feature. Closes bitcoin#24771.
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ReviewsSee the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Concept ACK
Concept ACK 🟥🟥🟥 |
Concept ACK. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 32e2ffc
crACK 32e2ffc Nit: We may want to remove |
ACK 32e2ffc The syscall sandbox has a rather significant maintenance burden for rather limited benefit. |
This has been removed upstream: bitcoin/bitcoin#27896.
This has been removed upstream: bitcoin/bitcoin#27896.
After initially being merged in #20487, it's no-longer clear that an internal syscall sandboxing mechanism is something that Bitcoin Core should have/maintain, especially when compared to better maintained/supported alterantives, i.e firejail.
There is more related discussion in #24771.
Note that given where it's used, the sandbox also gets dragged into the kernel.
If it's removed, this should not require any sort of deprecation, as this was only ever an opt-in, experimental feature.
Closes #24771.