<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Landlock on Pi Stack</title>
    <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/landlock/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Landlock on Pi Stack</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/landlock/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Self-Hosted Linux Sandboxing Frameworks — Landlock vs Seccomp-BPF vs Bubblewrap</title>
      <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-05-24-self-hosted-linux-sandboxing-frameworks-landlock-seccomp-bubblewrap-guide/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-05-24-self-hosted-linux-sandboxing-frameworks-landlock-seccomp-bubblewrap-guide/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Linux sandboxing frameworks provide essential isolation layers for running untrusted workloads on self-hosted servers. This guide compares three major approaches: &lt;strong&gt;Landlock&lt;/strong&gt; (the kernel LSM for filesystem sandboxing), &lt;strong&gt;Seccomp-BPF&lt;/strong&gt; (system call filtering), and &lt;strong&gt;Bubblewrap&lt;/strong&gt; (user-space sandboxing). Each offers different trade-offs between security guarantees, ease of configuration, and performance overhead.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
