upvote
Python already has a lot of half-baked (all the way up to nearly-fully-baked) interpreters, what's one more?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Python_software#Python...

reply
How do I sandbox CPython using OS features?

(Genuine question, I've been trying to find reliable, well documented, robust patterns for doing this for years! I need it across macOS and Linux and ideally Windows too. Preferably without having to run anything as root.)

reply
It could be difficult. My first thought would be a SELinux policy like this article attempted:

https://danwalsh.livejournal.com/28545.html

One might have different profiles with different permissions. A network service usually wouldn't need your hone directory while a personal utility might not need networking.

Also, that concept could be mixed with subprocess-style sandboxing. The two processes, main and sandboxed, might have different policies. The sandboxed one can only talk to main process over a specific channel. Nothing else. People usually also meter their CPU, RAM, etc.

INTEGRITY RTOS had language-specific runtimes, esp Ada and Java, that ran directly on the microkernel. A POSIX app or Linux VM could run side by side with it. Then, some middleware for inter-process communication let them talk to each other.

reply
Docker and other container runners allow it. https://containers.dev/ allows it too.

https://github.com/microsoft/litebox might somehow allow it too if a tool can be built on top of it, but there is no documentation.

reply
Every time I use Docker as a sandbox people warn me to watch out for "container escapes".

I trust Firecracker more because it was built by AWS specifically to sandbox Lambdas, but it doesn't work on macOS and is pretty fiddly to run on Linux.

reply
The repo does make a case for this, namely speed, which does make sense.
reply
True, but while CPython does have a reputation for slow startup, completely re-implementing isn't the only way to work around it - e.g. with eryx [1] I've managed to pre-initialize and snapshots the Wasm and pre-compile it, to get real CPython starting in ~15ms, without compromising on language features. It's doable!

[1] https://github.com/eryx-org/eryx

reply
Speed is not a feature if there isn't even syntax parity with CPython.
reply
Not having parity is a property they want, similar to Starlark. They explicitly want a less capable language for sandboxing.

Think of it as a language for their use case with Python's syntax and not a Python implementation. I don't know if it's a good idea or not, I'm just an intrigued onlooker, but I think lifting a familiar syntax is a legitimate strategy for writing DSLs.

reply