> not an actual freedom from memory-born vulnerabilities "Memory-born vulnerabilities" sounds like a broad term, and if it includes DOS issues then Rust code i

> not an actual freedom from memory-born vulnerabilities "Memory-born vulnerabilities" sounds like a broad term, and if it includes DOS issues then Rust code is as vulnerable as anything else. But it's worth being precise: Rust's security model is about preventing undefined behavior. If you have an out-of-bounds array write in C, that could do anything to the program. But in safe Rust code, all it can do is panic. Like you said, that's not necessarily any different from a DOS point of view, but it rules out a huge class of remote-code-execution bugs and leaks like Heartbleed. Of course it's still possible to write bugs and leak something you didn't mean to leak, but it shouldn't be possible to do that in a totally unrelated part of your process, and that's a big deal.