Application having Right Specific Rules
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:18 pm
This, to me, is the one thing that SBIE seems to be lacking, which will correct and chink in its armor. SBIE creates rules based on specific templates. I, for example have one sandbox created for Opera, which uses the rules that were determined safe to use with it. With the template I am able to keep an emails and bookmark charges (among other things) that I want to save. As another part of my system security I also use Shadow Defender, which enables me to get a clean slate on my system by just rebooting. The tricky thing is that I need to exclude certain directories from Shadow Defender so that my browser changes and email, is still there after the reboot. I think this is a semi-common approach. The fact that I have to exclude directories from Shadow Defender (or similar) and from SBIE means that both products have similar holes, ways that they are both vulnerable.
What is SBIE had the ability to specify which types of file types can be written in directories that already have direct or full access? That way, in my situation, I can specify that only Opera.exe can have the ability to write an *.mbs file to the mail directory. That way I am sure that no rouge malware was transfered because no .exe, .com, .bat, etc. file type was written. In that case, even though there is an exception made in my light virtualization application it is irrelevant because of SBIE's specific permissions.
What is SBIE had the ability to specify which types of file types can be written in directories that already have direct or full access? That way, in my situation, I can specify that only Opera.exe can have the ability to write an *.mbs file to the mail directory. That way I am sure that no rouge malware was transfered because no .exe, .com, .bat, etc. file type was written. In that case, even though there is an exception made in my light virtualization application it is irrelevant because of SBIE's specific permissions.