Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Hugsun's commentslogin

Docker containers use Linux kernel features to create an isolated environment, running on the same machine as docker is. This creates a virtual machine, with its own kernel, and runs the container in there. This gives stronger isolation and security guarantees.


I have the same question as GP. Your answer helps a little but not really. I might be naive, but I was under the impression that malicious code escaping a docker image and running amok on my host system was not something I should be too worried about. Especially if I run docker in rootless mode. Is that wrong?

For clarity I’m actually using podman, not Docker.


Oh no, you should definitely be worried about that. Podman might make it harder to escalate to host root, or manipulate other containers, but it is still vulnerable.

Now I'm curious to know how hardened the Docket Sandbox orchestration interface is. I guess we can assume they have run Mythos against it for a few weeks maybe? It's unclear.


Unsettling. I mean, is there any reasonable way to develop software in 2026? I've already sworn off ever installing npm directly on my host. Containerizing everything is laborious enough, but running a separate VM for everything?


You just need to work out the threat model for what you're working on. For trusted containerized workloads, where the attack surface is minimal, just containerization is fine. However, agents can do just about anything on your computer if you allow it and people aren't really shying away from `--dangerously-skip-permissions`, so better hardening (VMs, microVMs) is desirable.


BS.

Unless we're talking 0-day/CVE, running an unprivileged container is as trustable as a VM. The only difference is how strictly you want to hold the memory/CPU bar. Infact on linux, containers are more lightweight than VMs.

So yeah, not "vulnerable".


LLMs are great at finding 0-day, and people are rubbish at updating their containers and hosts to patch b-day.

Containers have access to the kernel ABI, and as shown in the latest kernel exploits, all the memory handling surface that exposes. The virtualisation interface, offering fewer services, is significantly harder.

Containers are obviously lighter than VMs, both to start and to schedule, but firecracker is pretty fast. gVisor pays overhead per syscall vs at startup.

So yeah, more vulnerable.


Got it. 0 days are possible so throwaway containerization. You should blog about it, will help millions of developers and companies. Heck, even consult with the hyperscalers - they will be riddled with their workloads.


Who do you think created firecracker? gVisor?


gvisor's overhead is mostly IO. especially if you use the KVM backend.


That depends on the runtime though. For example, libkrun lets you do this:

    docker run --runtime krun hello-world
That starts/runs the OCI in a qemu microvm.


When the host is a Mac or window , docker always run in a VM anyway.

On Linux, you can run docker directly on the host, but you can also very easily setup a vm with incus and run docker from there.


That can only be true if the workload is compute bound, not memory bandwidth bound.


Iceland has mostly been governed by the center right conservative independence party, which has been quick to sell land and resources to anyone interested. Kárahnjúkar is the canonical example of this, a huge hydro plant powering aluminium smelters owned by a foreign company.

Right now, different parties have the majority rule, and their interest in projects like these are not clear. I would suspect that a motivated investor could fairly easily get them built. The hurdles would be logistics and connectivity much more than red tape.

Iceland is culturally and politically scandinavian with some influence from the US. In august there will be a vote to start accession talks with the EU. This has been a heavily contested issue for years, largely due to Iceland's unique resources.


Is there anything of value in this project?

It sounds interesting at a glance, but it seems to be AI slop. So it's hard to tell if there are any interesting discoveries there, or just some worthless results described with performatively advanced language.


Have you tried Qwen 3.6 or Gemma 4? They're not frontier level but certainly have their uses.


Yes, they work great for small tasks, but not smart and powerful enough to beat with frontier models. Hope they will become better.


Note that your monitor is a QD-OLED, not a QLED monitor.

Despite the similar names, these are two very different technologies. QD-OLED is a OLED panel that uses QD (quantum dots) to achieve a wide color gamut. QLED is a LED backlit LCD panel that uses QD in a similar way.

The difference in performance characteristics of these two panel types is dominated by the difference between OLED and LCD.


That HN agent review is pretty usable. Very cool!


Thank you!


It is unbelievable that this is a controversial opinion.


That seems like a decently sized market. Maybe not for an AI lab though.


Sure it's a good market for a normal company. For a social media company it's pretty isolated and really limits the products that can come out. But their current selling points: propaganda, csam, and psychosis engagement are quite strong amongst that population.


Two things can be true at once.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: