4 ms·
This specific type of vulnerability would not be an issue in a safe C implementation for example, just like it would be an issue in an unsafe rust implementatio
by dependenttypes 6y ago
This specific type of vulnerability would not be an issue in a safe C implementation for example, just like it would be an issue in an unsafe rust implementation.
- Dylan16807 6y ago"safe C" and "unsafe Rust" sound like variant languages to me.
- dependenttypes 6y agoHow is "safe C" a variant language when it is within what the standard allows?
- Dylan16807 6y agoThe unsafeness of C is pretty widespread and fundamental. Whatever code you end up with is either going to be incompatible with normal compilers, or it's going to be so full of library calls that you can barely recognize it as C anymore. Unless you count sandboxing the entire program, and allowing errors inside the sandbox as long as they don't escape. Then C-to-WASM would be a safe C compiler, I guess.
- dependenttypes 6y ago> Whatever code you end up with is either going to be incompatible with normal compilers I do not believe that this is necessarily the case.
- titzer 6y agoThere have been research projects that have attempted to make a standards compliant "safe C" a number of different times. You either end up with a 3x execution time overhead, only support a subset, or break programs that do unsafe type punning. As a result, this is not viable.