Skip to content

Remove support for docker-in-docker, privileged and loopback-audio do… #753

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Remove support for docker-in-docker, privileged and loopback-audio do… #753

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jcristau
Copy link
Contributor

…cker-worker features

As far as I know they're unused at this point. In addition:

  • docker-in-docker involves talking to the docker daemon on the host, which has proven problematic as it bakes in dependencies on the docker daemon's version. It's also dubious from a security perspective, and as far as I can tell doesn't work in generic-worker/d2g (it doesn't have a proxy to only allow "safe" commands)
  • privileged is inherently problematic as it makes the task root-equivalent on the worker
  • loopback audio these days is achieved with dummy devices at the pulseaudio or pipewire level, not at the kernel level

@jcristau
Remove support for docker-in-docker, privileged and loopback-audio do…
6572074 
…cker-worker features

As far as I know they're unused at this point.  In addition:
- docker-in-docker involves talking to the docker daemon on the host,
  which has proven problematic as it bakes in dependencies on the docker
  daemon's version.  It's also dubious from a security perspective, and
  as far as I can tell doesn't work in generic-worker/d2g (it doesn't
  have a proxy to only allow "safe" commands)
- privileged is inherently problematic as it makes the task
  root-equivalent on the worker
- loopback audio these days is achieved with dummy devices at the
  pulseaudio or pipewire level, not at the kernel level
@jcristau jcristau requested a review from a team as a code owner August 28, 2025 13:51
@jcristau jcristau requested a review from bhearsum August 28, 2025 13:51
@jcristau jcristau added the BREAKING CHANGE Backwards incompatible request that will require major version bump label Aug 28, 2025
bhearsum
bhearsum approved these changes Sep 2, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bhearsum bhearsum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These all look unused in Gecko (and hopefully elsewhere as well?). Should be safe to remove.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bhearsum bhearsum bhearsum approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
BREAKING CHANGE Backwards incompatible request that will require major version bump
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@jcristau @bhearsum