135
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
135 points (99.3% liked)
Linux
12881 readers
738 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The Firefox Flatpak has much weaker isolation because the Flatpak sandbox interferes with the browser sandbox. This means a malicious site can compromise other sites and even the whole browser with a single exploit instead of the two normally required (which is a significant degradation in protection). The specific part blocked by Flatpak is user namespace sandboxing by Firefox. If you can help it, DO NOT install as Flatpak. Snap does not have this problem, but nobody likes Snap. Chromium has a similar problem as a Flatpak.
Thanks for the good explanation!
Yeah np
Is this because everything runs as root inside Flatpak? Wouldn't it be possible to run as non-root inside Flatpak?
No, nothing runs as root in a Flatpak. The problem is that Flatpak stops apps from using unprivileged user namespaces, which is used by all modern browsers to isolate web contents. Because the browser (Firefox) can't use namespaces, a malicious website can use a single exploit instead of needing to chain two separate exploits, making it significantly more likely to break the sandbox.
Ah interesting. I was thinking of this post
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/61124103
Nobody likes snaps because Canonical is exactly like Microsoft: the only thing they could make that wouldn't suck would be vacuums.