So it's basically a container with a fancy name, innit?
TO me, that's the important distinction: sandboxing limits what the agent can do but it doesn't necessarily enforce that the agent must run inside the sandbox. You need a separate control layer to enforce that boundary.
Just a small meta note: most of the comments in this thread appear to be posting their own codebase (typically AI-generated) that accomplishes the same goal. It's interesting that this problem is simultaneously in high demand and yet considered trivial enough to vibe code per-user solutions to it.
On Linux, you can skip Docker and use bubblewrap. Some inspiration: https://blog.gpkb.org/posts/ai-agent-sandbox/
...or...just hear me out now...we could limit it in the harness.
Don't give it shell access, just predefined tools.
The linked page implies there is no linux support, I wonder why. It's there in the docs if you hunt for it.
Docker management will fail their tech at every opportunity.
[dead]
[flagged]
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
Here's another sandbox that I found interesting: https://github.com/ashishb/amazing-sandbox