Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kaliszad's commentslogin

Many people seem to be running OpenCode and similar tools on their laptop with basically no privilege separation, sandboxing, fine-grained permissions settings in the tool itself. This tendency is reflected also by how many plugins are designed, where the default assumption is the tool is running unrestricted on the computer next to some kind of IDE as many authentication callbacks go to some port on localhost and the fallback is to parse out the right parameter from the callback URL. Also for some reasons these tools tend to be relative resource hogs even when waiting for a reply from a remote provider. I mean, I am glad they exist, but it seems very rough around the edges compared to how much attention these tools get nowadays.

Please run at least a dev-container or a VM for the tools. You can use RDP/ VNC/ Spice or even just the terminal with tmux to work within the confines of the container/ machine. You can mirror some stuff into the container/ machine with SSHFS, Samba/ NFS, 9p. You can use all the traditional tools, filesystems and such for reliable snapshots. Push the results separately or don't give direct unrestricted git access to the agent.

It's not that hard. If you are super lazy, you can also pay for a VPS $5/month or something like that and run the workload there.


Hi.

> Please run at least a dev-container or a VM for the tools.

I would like to know how to do this. Could you share your favorite how-to?


I have a pretty non-standard setup but with very standard tools. I didn't follow any specific guide. I have ZFS as the filesystem, for each VM a ZVOL or dataset + raw image and libvirt/ KVM on top. This can be done using e.g. Debian GNU/ Linux in a somewhat straight forward way. You can probably do something like it in WSL2 on Windows although that doesn't really sandbox stuff much or with Docker/ Podman or with VirtualBox.

If you want a dedicated virtual host, Proxmox seems to be pretty easy to install even for relative newcomers and it has a GUI that's decent for new people and seasoned admins as well.

For the remote connection I just use SSH and tmux, so I can comfortably detach and reattach without killing the tool that's running inside the terminal on the remote machine.

I hope this helps even though I didn't provide a step-by step guide.


If you are using VSCode against WSL2 or Linux and you have installed Docker, managing devcontainers is very straightforward. What I usually do is to execute "Connect to host" or "Connect to WSL", then create the project directory and ask VSCode to "Add Dev Container Configuration File". Once the configuration file is created, VSCode itself will ask you if you want to start working inside the container. I'm impressed with the user experience of this feature, to be honest.

Working with devcontainers from CLI wasn't very difficult [0], but I must confess that I only tested it once.

[0] https://containers.dev/supporting


>> Please run at least a dev-container or a VM for the tools.

> I would like to know how to do this. Could you share your favorite how-to?

See: https://www.docker.com/get-started/

EDIT:

Perhaps you are more interested in various sandboxing options. If so, the following may be of interest:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46595393


Note that while containers can be leveraged to run processes at lower privilege levels, they are not secure by default, and actually run at elevated privileges compared to normal processes.

Make sure the agent cannot launch containers and that you are switching users and dropping privileges.

On a Mac you are running a VM machine that helps, but on Linux it is the user that is responsible for constraints, and by default it is trivial to bypass.

Containers have been fairly successful for security because the most popular images have been leveraging traditional co-hosting methods, like nginx dropping root etc…

By themselves without actively doing the same they are not a security feature.

While there are some reactive defaults, Docker places the responsibility for dropping privileges on the user and image. Just launching a container is security through obscurity.

It can be a powerful tool to improve security posture, but don’t expect it by default.


Hi. You are clearly an LLM user. Have you considered asking an LLM to explain how to do this? If not, why not?


would an LLM have a favourite tool? I'm sure it'll answer, but would it be from personal experience?


I checked with Gemini 3 Fast and it provided instructions on how to set up a Dev Container or VM. It recommended a Dev Container and gave step-by-step instructions. It also mentioned VMs like VirtualBox and VMWare and recommended best practices.

This is exactly what I would have expected from an expert. Is this not what you are getting?

My broader question is: if someone is asking for instructions for setting up a local agent system, wouldn't it be fair to assume that they should try using an LLM to get instructions? Can't we assume that they are already bought in to the viewpoint that LLMs are useful?


the llm will comment on the average case. when we ask a person for a favourite tool, we expect anecdotes about their own experience - I liked x, but when I tried to do y, it gave me z issues because y is an unusual requirement.

when the question is asked on an open forum, we expect to get n such answers and sometimes we'll recognise our own needs in one or two of them that wouldn't be covered by the median case.

does that make sense?


> when we ask a person for a favourite tool

I think you're focusing too much on the word 'favourite' and not enough on the fact that they didn't actually ask for a favourite tool. They asked for a favourite how-to for using the suggested options, a Dev Container or a VM. I think before asking this question, if a person is (demonstrably in this case) into LLMs, it should be reasonable for them to ask an LLM first. The options are already given. It's not difficult to form a prompt that can make a reasonable LLM give a reasonable answer.

There aren't that many ways to run a Dev Container or VM. Everyone is not special and different, just follow the recommended and common security best practices.


In 2026? It will be the tool from the vendor who spends the most ad dollars with Anthropic/Google/etc.


Because I value human input too.


I've started a project [1] recently that tries to implement this sandbox idea. Very new and extremely alpha, but mostly works as a proof of concept (except haven't figured out how to get Shelley working yet), and I'm sure there's a ton of bugs and things to work through, but could be fun to test and experiment with in a vps and report back any issues.

[1] https://github.com/jgbrwn/shelley-lxc


Claude asks you for permissions every time it wants to run something.


Until you run --dangerously-skip-permissions


That's why you run with "dangerously allow all." What's the point of LLMs if I have to manually approve everything? IME you only get half decent results if the agent can run tests, run builds and iterate. I'm not going to look at the wall of texts it produces on every iterations, they are mostly convincing bullshit. I'll review the code it wrote once the tests pass, but I don't want to be "in the loop".


I really like the product created by fly.io's https://sprites.dev/ for AI's sandboxes effectively. I feel like its really apt here (not sponsored lmao wish I was)

Oh btw if someone wants to run servers via qemu, I highly recommend quickemu. It provides default ssh access,sshfs, vnc,spice and all such ports to just your local device of course and also allows one to install debian or any distro (out of many many distros) using quickget.

Its really intuitive for what its worth, definitely worth a try https://github.com/quickemu-project/quickemu

I personally really like zed with ssh open remote. I can always open up terminals in it and use claude code or opencode or any and they provide AI as well (I dont use much AI this way, I make simple scripts for myself so I just copy paste for free from the websites) but I can recommend zed for what its worth as well.


I also program a lot in Clojure/Script. Do you also consider thinking token and the number of iterations in the token efficiency?


I don't think thinking tokens are affected, as LLMs "think" mostly in plain language, with occasional code snippets.


I would assume for certain problems LLMs have a solution readily available for JavaScript/ TypeScript or similarly popular languages but not for Clojure/Script. Therefore my thinking was that the process of getting to a workable solution would be longer and more expensive in terms of tokens. I however don't have any relevant data on this so I may just be wrong.


For small SMBs using Proxmox is reasonably ok-ish. Running in production for 2+ years already our customers are quite happy. We also sent some patches to Proxmox for other much larger clients...


If you were more polite, you could have a good entry to the discussion.

Yes, Proxmox is built on Debian so anything Debian can do Proxmox VE can mostly do as well without major issues.


Anyone who is really committed to their infrastructure will not build it on top of highly proprietary stuff where you have 0 visibility into what's actually happening so you can only hope that somebody fixes it sustainably, in a reasonable time frame and permanently.

With open source, if you have the right people, you can find/ bisect down to the commit and function where the problem is exactly, which speeds up the remedy immensely. We have done such a thing with backup restores from the Proxmox Backup Server. The patches are now in Proxmox VE 9.0 because the low hanging fruit problem was actually with the client code not the Proxmox Backup Server.


You can have a look at XCP-ng. They have the expertise and it's originally a fork of Citrix XenServer however they are completely on their own feet now delivering some interesting advancements.


Seems like a few negotiation skills would be of better use than doing extreme amounts of work so somebody can take months on approving new hardware. Well guess what, the people that did slow down hardware procurement are now slowing down deployment of cloud resources as well because the fundamental problem wasn't addressed and that's organizational misalignment and disfunction.


Even if you can get instant approval, Dell or HP won't Fedex you 50 servers next day like they will 50 laptops.

And once you're a customer you get to deal with sales channels full of quotes and useless meetings and specialists. You can't just order from the website.


You can get servers elsewhere as well and they can be more agile than Dell/ HPE/ SuperMicro/ Lenovo. Asus, Asrock, Gigabyte and some other brands can ship servers rather quickly. Perhaps not the next day but the prices are much lower out of the door especially if you are a smaller customer. Most companies know well in advance how much compute/ storage they will need. So if something takes a month or two it isn't a big issue.


You're going to negotiate with the structure of an entire corporation?

Excuse me CEO your budgeting process is inconvenient to my work, please change it all to be more responsive.

This is not how things work and not how changes are made. Unless you get into the C-suite or at least become a direct report of someone who is nobody cares and you're told to just deal with it. You can't negotiate because you're four levels of management away from being invited to the table.

An organization that can make agile capital expenditures in response to the needs of an individual contributor is either barely out of the founder's garage or a magical fairyland unicorn.


You would be surprised. I have unclogged processes inside and between companies before where people would tell me it's not possible or that success is unlikely.

And yes, if you are working with professionals most expenditures can be planned well in advance so you definitely can take months or even more than a year in the process. If there is a major issue affecting the business of the company you would be surprised what is possible. I've got things approved in weeks in an enterprise of 2000+ employees before and I was 5 levels down from the CEO then. I have improved my negotiation skills greatly since then (it helps when you co-found a consulting company).


This is very laudable!

The letter's first page looks very low effort, which unfortunately is the first impression undermining the certainly large amounts of work people have invested in this. The note about needing a PhD could well be left to the form instead of sounding extremely elitist right on the first page. Yes, it's shallow and everything but do you want to be right or get your way?


People are busy getting stuff done. Many people don't visit forums if they don't have issues, aren't looking for jobs, aren't offering jobs etc.

Yes, doing Clojure is more demanding initially than many other languages where you can basically template/ LLM your way to anything. With Clojure you might find it easier to do bigger and longer term projects that are rather easy to maintain even for a single person or a small team. That of course doesn't cause much buzz, because it's boring in the good sense.


Clojure(Script) is a mature, boring in the good sense language and ecosystem. It opened a whole subculture and dialects/ implementations like ClojureCLR, Babashka, nbb, Jank, Janet, Fennel, Joker, Basilisp, Hy, Clojerl and at least a few others I forgot to mention that can perhaps be found on this list: https://github.com/chr15m/awesome-clojure-likes

We are building apps for our clients in it, we will also have our own product built with Clojure and ClojureScript soon.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: