Sign up ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

On a *nix system I can use a chroot to isolate 2 processes from each other and from the rest of the system. Is there any similar security system under windows? Or is there any way to prevent 2 processes from reading/writing to each others files?

share|improve this question
I'm not sure the security tag is warranted here. – MDMarra Jul 18 '10 at 16:54
@MarkM So you would say that a chroot isn't a security system? Also, that attack doesn't work on a grsecurity chroot ( – Rook Jul 18 '10 at 17:50
@The Rook - In that kerneltrap discussion, kernel devs discuss the fact that chroot was never intended to be a security device/ – MDMarra Jul 18 '10 at 18:12
@MarkM Interesting, but with the grsecuirty improvements the only method of breaking out would be to rip a hole into kernel land, which could be done buffer overflow in linux (or whatever kernel you are using). – Rook Jul 18 '10 at 18:35
@The Rook - Right, I was simply saying that you may want to rephrase the question. There have been extensions to chroot or spins on the concept (like jails) that have been designed with security in mind. In your post, you refer to chroot as a security device, which it was never intended to be. – MDMarra Jul 18 '10 at 19:57

4 Answers 4

up vote 4 down vote accepted

I'm not sure you will gain anything on Windows by chrooting - do you have a specfic need?

In case any the top result on google is

Perhaps application virtualization might be an option? Microsoft has the following to say about it:

In a physical environment, every application depends on its OS for a range of services, including memory allocation, device drivers, and much more. Incompatibilities between an application and its operating system can be addressed by either server virtualization or presentation virtualization; but for incompatibilities between two applications installed on the same instance of an OS, you need Application Virtualization.

share|improve this answer
One of my processes was poorly written and very insecure, management doesn't want to fix it because it would be "too expensive". I expect this process to get owned eventually and i want to limit the impact on my system. If you really believe there is nothing to gain, then you must read more about chroots. – Rook Jul 18 '10 at 17:49
"I'm not sure you will gain anything on Windows by chrooting" Why? Is this like trying to patch one hole in a net? I am well aware that windows is one of the least secure platforms used in modern times, are you saying that fixing architectural security flaws in windows is just hopeless? – Rook Apr 3 at 19:42


Not exactly like chroot. It does setup a sandbox for each program you specify. It can easily keep processes isolated.

share|improve this answer

I wouldn't use anything like this, you are running under Windows mate.

NTFS has the most fine grained access rights you can find. Its not hard to let a prozess start with lower privileged user, and only giving that user access to the files of this single application.

No need to use something like chroot, which is not a security tool, when you can already define what user is allowed to do what in what directory.

Its no different than like giving the Apache under Linux its own user, only allowed to work inside his folders.

share|improve this answer
Windows is one of the least secure platforms i have ever had the privilege to hack. No one should be using anything by Microsoft if they care about security. A chroot is the "bare minimum" security system we can use to try and lock down this joke of a platform. – Rook Apr 3 at 19:47

There is a chroot.exe included in Gow (Gnu On Windows)

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.