Most recent (and the first public) Chrome ITW attack used memory corruption attack. One to exploit the renderer, another to exploit the underlying kernel to esc

Most recent (and the first public) Chrome ITW attack used memory corruption attack. One to exploit the renderer, another to exploit the underlying kernel to escape the sandbox. I believe the same is true (roughly) with the Coinbase attack that went after Firefox. In short, memory safety is not only responsible for the majority of reported vulns, but also the exploited ones, at least in the case of browsers. > Heartbleed, Shellshock, Dirty COW etc. would all happen exactly the same way in different programming languages. Heartbleed is impossible in a memory safe language, at the least. Same with cloudbleed for that matter. DirtyCow and shellshock, sure. It's a bit of a moot point though - human energy is finite, consider if we could spend energy on problems like DirtyCow and shellshock instead of memory safety issues that simply don't exist in many languages.