Comment on Chromium vs Brave

• qwert230839265026494@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Your help is much appreciated!

  Question: Why do you think need such high security for a browser?

  Good prompt! I actually started questioning my own motivations from this. And I’d say that the best I could come up with was that it’s required in order to attain the “peace of mind” from having properly secured my browser activity; which happens to be the primary activity on my device anyways.

  source

  • t0m5k1@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Valid response, but why do you need to protect the OS from the browser when the browser (Brave) is already sandboxing and the browser is not an attack vector that can be directly exploited to gain access/root on your OS?

    What I mean is that the tabs themselves are sandboxed to protect accounts that are opened in each from being breached, the bowser itself is obfuscating your fingerprint and blocking known bad actor sites etc so this leaves only what you manually download and here the browser will warn you if a given download has the potential to harm.

    So unless you are downloading files from very questionable locations I can’t see the need for a containerised browser.

    Containers are good and yes have flaws but the main purpose of them is to add another layer between the application and the OS so if application is exploited the attacker has to break another wall/layer to get to the real root.

    I know in April 2021 the was a PoC that used JavaScript to reverse the effect of a patch which allowed an attacker to break out of the chromium sandbox, but that was never used and if it was the attacker would first need to breach a site to deploy the code that you would then execute by visiting the site or it would be fed to you via a phishing attempt. Both of these delivery methods would need to be very stealthy and fast. currently there are 4 known CVEs for brave: (sorry for long link)

    www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list.php?vendor_…

    None of these provide an attack vector that will allow access.

    source

    • qwert230839265026494@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’ve been enjoying your responses a lot! I just wanted to express my gratitude one more time!

      Uhmm…, but I think that somewhat of a misunderstanding might happened somewhere.

      Valid response, but why do you need to protect the OS from the browser when the browser (Brave) is already sandboxing and the browser is not an attack vector that can be directly exploited to gain access/root on your OS?

      Just to be clear. I acknowledge Brave’s (or rather Chromium’s for that matter) sandbox capabilities. I’m not necessarily afraid of whatever I’m doing inside to break out of the sandbox. Sure, the ‘risk’ (if at all) can be further circumvented with the use of VMs and whatnot and for some people this approach is justified. But me lamenting on using something like Qubes (eventually) is more about having an OS that actually has sane security defaults. And having browsers run in VMs is just part of that. Currently, I just want a secure and private browser to use on desktop. So far, it seems that Brave is superior over Chromium due to added features like fingerprint-spoofing, the inevitable discontinuation of Manifest v2 etc.

      What I am afraid of is how secure (continued) operation within containers would be. So even if Brave (or whichever browser for that matter) is not the culprit, the rest of the container environment might endanger the rest of my system. Of course, I’m a total noob so I might be talkin’ outta my A$$. So please correct me if my understanding is faulty.

      So unless you are downloading files from very questionable locations I can’t see the need for a containerised browser.

      Hehe, I guess if I would be forced to do a thing like that I would do so within a VM 😅.

      Containers are good and yes have flaws but the main purpose of them is to add another layer between the application and the OS so if application is exploited the attacker has to break another wall/layer to get to the real root.

      So I’ve mostly been using well-integrated ‘pet-containers’ like the ones known from Distrobox (with a relevant recent feature). Aside from those I’ve been exposed to the earlier article and to this video. These ‘expositions’ have made me go from a Distrobox-enjoyer to a pessimist that doesn’t dare to come close to them until I’ve better educated myself on them 🤣.

      source

      • t0m5k1@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I’ve been enjoying your responses a lot! I just wanted to express my gratitude one more time!

        Thanks man, means a lot these days.

        What I am afraid of is how secure (continued) operation within containers would be. So even if Brave (or whichever browser for that matter) is not the culprit, the rest of the container environment might endanger the rest of my system.

        If your container for brave is running but the browser itself is closed, there is no way for to happen within the container because the software that would be connected to the internet is closed/quit/stopped. In fact that container should be reported as down by whichever management subsystem is provided by said container (portainer, lxd, systemd-namespaces, etc)

        So I’ve mostly been using well-integrated ‘pet-containers’ like the ones known from Distrobox (with a relevant recent feature). Aside from those I’ve been exposed to the earlier article and to this video. These ‘expositions’ have made me go from a Distrobox-enjoyer to a pessimist that doesn’t dare to come close to them until I’ve better educated myself on them

        I think you should look more into what containers are and can do, You previously said that your system is low power but distrobox is making loads of of full OS/distro containers which for the most part act like a VM. Distrobox is a good way to test drive a distro OR allow a dev to ensure the app they’ve made works on their target distro’s for chosen use case.

        All you really need to do is run a single application within a container, not a whole distro!/os Why do I say this? Well resource consumption for one and why replicate an entire distro/os when an app can be run inside a container: bacchi.org/posts/brave-in-docker/

        Additionally I spoke about attack vectors, running another distro/OS inside a docker may well have samba, ssh running by default, If the container for that is not firewalled that is is an attack vector that will allow RCE and exploits be run inside that container!

        Aside from those I’ve been exposed to the earlier article and to this video.

        The first minute of that video talks of nginx webserver image, That is a webserver running inside a container, with distrobox you have the rest of the OS inside the container as well as nginx. Do you get what I say now?

        I suggest you use the above link I gave to look into running just a browser within a container, drop distrobox (unless you need to test drive distros) and learn about running a single application within a container, when you can do that find a container framework that provides the security you want/like then run your “untrusted” applications in containers and rejoice with a slightly faster machine.

        source

        • -> View More Comments