Hacker News Reader

> - The "virtual home" specified with --private=/path/to/folder runs the app with the specified folder as a home folder. I use this for all the apps I sandbox to make sure my real home does not get polluted by tens of config files, cache, etc.

I understand firejail does a lot more but FYI, you can do this simply by typing `HOME=/path/to/folder <app>` in your shell.

Or do this in a wrapper script, for example:

    #!/bin/sh
    export HOME=/path/to/dir
    firefox

I've been using Linux for just under 3 years now and I had no idea this was a thing. I'm amazed at new things I learn every day. Thanks a lot!

I do that with Wine: giving each program its own WINEPREFIX. For example, EAC lives under ~/wine/eac. This makes program removal easy as well.

I do this too! Different Netscape versions don,t get along well on the same "system"

It looks neat, but I'm not familiar with most of the tools and concepts mentioned on its page, so if I were to use it, I'd mostly do so as a "fire and forget" and then hope it does its thing properly. Looking at the readme, that means I'd run `firecfg --fix-sound`, then `sudo firecfg`, and then after a logout and login never look back at it.

Would you (or anyone else) happen to know if there's any risks for an unknowledgable user like me to do that, e.g. of breaking my system without knowing how to repair it?

I am far from expert in this but I am not sure I would be comfortable automatically configuring all my apps to run through Firejail using firecfg (if only because in case of breakage it would be harder to understand where it is coming from).

In my workflow, I keep things mostly manual and configure each app I want to sandbox explicitly by creating a shortcut (usually I create a "launcher" in /usr/local/bin so that it takes priority over whatever is in /usr/bin). Here is the one I have for Firefox as an example in "/usr/local/bin/firefox":

firejail --profile=/etc/firejail/firefox.profile --private=~/.sandboxes/firefox/ /usr/bin/firefox --no-remote $@

In terms of risks, are you mostly concerned about security risks? Or breakage?

Thanks. I'm concerned about both, but I suppose I consider breakage to be the biggest risk for something of which I hardly know what it does.

Your approach sounds viable though, so I might look into setting something similar up for myself as well. Thanks for sharing.