3 ms·
As a counterpoint security in e.g. Bluetooth has been an ongoing problem and even "mature" code like ext4 has recurring problems. Somehow I doubt the problem is
by hedgehog 5y ago
As a counterpoint security in e.g. Bluetooth has been an ongoing problem and even "mature" code like ext4 has recurring problems. Somehow I doubt the problem is that the people involved are not smart enough or trying hard enough. Maybe it's worth revisiting what tools we use.
- b20000 5y agothere are many situations where security does not matter. so that is not a reason to force rust into the code base. not everyone is working on a device that needs to be secure.
- msbarnett 5y ago> not everyone is working on a device that needs to be secure. And those drivers can continue to be written in C. Rust is merely an option.
- b20000 5y agoi need to be able to read and understand any driver’s source code without having to learn rust.
- dagmx 5y agoSo the whole kernel should be beholden to you as the minimum viable target then? I hope you realize how self centered that outlook is.
- msbarnett 5y agoThe rubric for decision making in Linux kernel driver development is not "what HN user b20000 thinks they need", as far as I am aware.
- b20000 5y agothis is not about me. it is about keeping the kernel tree reasonably accessible for small startups and device creators who do not have the funding of FAANGs and cannot afford to take on more complexity on top of something that is already very complex.
- dagmx 5y agoAnyone who values simplicity over security in the most used kernel in the world, has their priorities in the wrong place.