I don't have any issues (yet) running it with the sandbox on, but I agree it's good to test it extensively beforehand and depending on the stability wait until the Tor Project defaults to it. On 2017-06-21 00:31, ng0@infotropique.org wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 23:07:38 +0200, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > > Hi Rutger, > > Rutger Helling skribis: > > From 5e93733bba145ac3e3a3f39fb43f25ad7125fa2f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Rutger Helling > Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:15:17 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: tor: Add seccomp support. > > * gnu/packages/tor.scm (tor)[inputs]: Add libseccomp. > Applied, thanks. > > Do you think the GuixSD service should set "Sandbox 1" by default? The > Besides, the GuixSD service runs Tor in a container, but that doesn't > necessarily provide the same guarantees: > . > > Ludo'. As mentioned earlier in the thread: I don't think it should be default until we have found it to be stable enough. I experienced several "sandbox violations" when running this in the last days. Is this good? Is this bad? I had no chance to investigate this so far. It also goes against torproject recommendations, as they consider sandbox (seccomp) in tor to be an unstable + testing feature, disabled by default.