> If AFL would catch the same bugs, Rust isn't better than C in this case. You can find a list of my vobsub bugs in the Rust Fuzz Trophy Case: https://github.c

> If AFL would catch the same bugs, Rust isn't better than C in this case. You can find a list of my vobsub bugs in the Rust Fuzz Trophy Case: https://github.com/rust-fuzz/trophy-case https://github.com/rust-fuzz/trophy-case They are: 1. The shift overflow: This was harmless in both C and Rust, I believe. 2. The arithmetic overflow: This was a runtime panic in Rust, resulting in a clean crash. In C, this might have been exploitable with a complex enough attack. 3. The three "invalid slice" errors. All of these were clean runtime panics in Rust, and I'm pretty sure that at least two of them would have been exploitable in C with enough work. So Rust has a couple of advantages here. Out of 5 errors found by the fuzzer, the worst thing that could happen in Rust would have been crashing the program in a controlled fashion. In C, we would have been looking at memory corruption and quite possibly escalation. Secondly, Rust's runtime checks actually make fuzzers work better. Even simple checks like "is the end index of this slice great >= to the beginning index?" tend to catch problems almost as soon as they occur.