Conversation

Replying to and
Unlike ChromeOS, they aren't actually implementing a proper isolation boundary around it with the namespaces and bridging. It has moved towards that, but it's not at that point. Even the ChromeOS implementation is really just properly separated / contained, not so much sandboxed.
1
Replying to and
I don't think gVisor is close to the point where it could run Android inside it though. It would need a fair bit more work to reach that point. ChromeOS and Anbox are taking the short cut of just turning the host OS into Android, with Anbox also not doing meaningful isolation.
2
Replying to
That's not what I said. I said that you need the host to have an Android kernel. They use modules to make it into one if it isn't built with Android support included: github.com/anbox/anbox-mo The Android container uses the host kernel directly including the Binder module.
1
Replying to
It's how it works on ChromeOS too, but on ChromeOS, I'm quite sure they preserve the usual sandboxing / security model / kernel attack surface reduction that's done primarily via SELinux. Anbox disables Android's SELinux usage, which is how a lot of the security model is done.
1
Replying to
The internal security model protects the kernel from apps, and hides a lot of information leaked from the kernel to apps. By disabling SELinux, it's substantially breaking down the separation between the kernel and the app, making it less isolated than it would be even normally.
2
Show replies
Replying to and
Anbox has user namespaced root inside the container. It's letting the Android system set up mounts, netfilter and so on. It can do everything that root can do inside a user namespace. It uses nearly all kernel / hardware functionality natively / directly and is just namespaced.
1