All Topics
All Topics
Technology
Technology
Design
Design
Programming
Programming
Science
Science
News
News
Gaming
Gaming
Entertainment
Entertainment
Business
Business
Finance
Finance
Sports
Sports
Health
Health
Food
Food
Travel
Travel
Art
Art
Music
Music
Books
Books
Education
Education
Politics
Politics
Personal
Personal
No algorithm. No AI slop. No ads. Just RSS. Pro-human. Indie writers. Real journalism. Open web. Chronological. Hand toasted.

Why Python Cannot Be Sandboxed and Alternative Approaches: Firecracker, gVisor, and WASM

By

mavdol04

4mo ago· 7 min readenCode

Summary

This article examines the fundamental challenges of sandboxing Python code and compares different sandboxing approaches. It explains why Python cannot be effectively sandboxed due to its highly introspective nature, mutable runtime, and the ability to access core interpreter elements through the object graph. The article then compares alternative sandboxing solutions including Firecracker (microVMs), gVisor (container sandboxing), and WebAssembly (WASM) as more viable approaches for running untrusted code securely.

Key quotes

· 3 pulled
Python doesn't have a built-in way to run untrusted code safely. Multiple attempts have been made, but none really succeeded.
Because Python is a highly introspective object-oriented language with a mutable runtime. Core elements of the interpreter can be accessed through the object graph, frames and tracebacks, making runtime isolation difficult.
This means that even aggressive restrictions can be bypassed.
Snippet from the RSS feed
Notes on sandboxing untrusted code - why Python can't be sandboxed, comparing Firecracker/gVisor/WASM approaches - sandboxing_untrusted_python.md

You might also wanna read