Unfortunately, the browser extension is proprietary. They used to have an open source one but they stopped maintaining it.
Proprietary was a dealbreaker for me. There is no way to verify that it isn't selling everything I type even if I do have it configured to point at a local server.
I'm also concerned that the extension may eventually no longer work against local servers as well.
https://github.com/languagetool-org/languagetool-browser-addon/issues/247
As an alternative, there is harper by wordpress: https://github.com/Automattic/harper
It is webassembly and runs entirely in your browser.
EDIT:
I will add that the rest of the languagetool ecosystem continues to work fine. Libreoffice now has a built in client, which you can point at your own hosted server. VSCode [1] also has their own languagetool extension. I use those and those work great. But in the browser I use ~~harper~~ nothing. I should probably install harper.
[1] Well, technically I use [code-oss]https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Visual_Studio_Code), which gets the extension from https://open-vsx.org/




Kind of.
Copyfail would punch through user namespaces to get root straight on the host. User namespaces only really protect you against vulnerabilities in non kernel applications.
Limited capibilities/seccomp policies did help, though. In my admittedly limited testing, some of the vulnerabilities wouldn't work in podman, but they would work in docker. This wasn't due to user namespaces, but this was due to podman having stricter capibilities/seccomp policies than docker by default.
This implies that even if you were using docker rootless, they still would have been able to break out and get root in one go.
User namespaces don't add that much security, in my opinion. Assuming your container has a non root user inside, adding user namespaces just changes the amount of cve's/zerodays from 2 to maybe 3:
With a rootful container it's:
With user namespaces it becomes:
User namespaces are like every other Linux security solution, they are extremely complex, hard to configure, and they don't actually add that much security for the trouble The article I linked above has a section about them:
Their complexity makes them difficult to secure and execute properly, and adds a ton of attack surface to the kernel.
Dirty frag, for example, was using user namespaces as one of the ways it would escalate. Most container runtimes restrict user namespace creation within user namespaced containers (via seccomp/capabilities), so running dirtyfrag in a container wouldn't have worked. But, at the same time, dirtyfrag is only possible in the first place because of the attack surface user namespaces cause.
I mostly use docker and rootfull podman for everything. You already need a CVE/zeroday to do a container break out in the first place, so just keep your runtimes up to date and you should be good. If you really care about being proactive with security, and trying to preemptively prevent issues, user namespaces are not really a good solution, better is just to use a VM container runtime like kata or microvm, or a userspace kernel like gvisor or syd. They are pretty easy to use. You can just set them as your container runtime, in docker, podman, or kubes, and things will mostly just work. Those (and other kernel isolation solutions) would have actually beaten dirtyfrag, copyfail, and the like of recent vulns.