3 ms·
It's amusing that one of the bugs they found and fixed was a buffer reuse bug -- similar to what caused heartbleed -- will help in my 'memory safe languages are
by amichal 11y ago
It's amusing that one of the bugs they found and fixed was a buffer reuse bug -- similar to what caused heartbleed -- will help in my 'memory safe languages are not magic bullets' rebuttals.
- hueving 11y agoSo is your rebuttal that since there are some reuse bugs, reading out of bounds is ok?
- tedunangst 11y agoHow does one go from "memory safe languages are not magic bullets" to "reading out of bounds is ok"? That's not a type safe argument.
- pcwalton 11y agoI think the point is just that "memory safety is a magic bullet" is a straw man version of the actual argument, "memory safety improves security significantly over not having it".
- tedunangst 11y agoAlas, I see the strawman version trotted out at least as frequently as the more reasonable version.
- wtracy 11y agoI've seem people believe that memory leaks can't happen in programs written in garbage-collected programs. So, yeah, the belief that garbage collection and/or bounds checking is a magic bullet really needs to be addressed.
- eru 11y agoThey are damn good bullets. Just not silver bullets. Restricting mutability would help somewhat. (Another bullet.)
- Taek 11y agoA big mistake I made early on was assuming garbage collected meant no memory leaks. But alas, you can keep pointers to objects you don't need anymore. For go in particular, I make mistakes when passing slices to multiple objects. Memory safety slip because the slices are 'passed by value', but underneath they point to the same data. Easy to forget.