3 ms·

I can certainly understand it for something like sudo or for other tools where the attack surface is larger and certain security-critical interactions are happe

by ls65536 11mo ago

I can certainly understand it for something like sudo or for other tools where the attack surface is larger and certain security-critical interactions are happening, but in this case it really seems like a questionable tradeoff, where the benefits in this specific case are abstract (theoretically no more possibility of any memory-safety bugs) but the costs are very concrete (incompatibility issues; and possibly other, new, non-memory-safety bugs being introduced with new code). EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm otherwise perfectly happy that these experiments are being done, and we should all be better off for it and learn something as a result. Obviously somebody has assessed that this tradeoff has at least a decent probability of being a net positive here in some timeframe, and if others are unhappy about it then I suppose they're welcome to install another implementation of coreutils, or use a different distro, or write their own, or whatever.

johnisgood 11mo ago
> "sudo" Hence "doas". OpenBSD has a lot of new stuff throughout the codebase. No need for adding a bloated dependency (e.g. Rust) just because you want to re-implement "yes" in a "memory-safe language" when you probably have no reasons to.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
JuniperMesos 11mo ago
I'd prefer it if all software was written in languages that made it as easy as possible to avoid bugs, including memory-safety bugs, regardless of whether it seems like it has a large attack surface or not.
pdimitar 11mo ago
I view `uutils` as a good opportunity to get rid of legacy baggage that might be used by just 0.03% of the community but has to sit there and it impedes certain feature adding or bug fixing. F.ex. `sudo-rs` does not support most of what the normal `sudo` does... and it turned out that most people did not need most of `sudo` in the first place. Less code leads to less bugs.

by ls65536 11mo ago

johnisgood 11mo ago

> "sudo" Hence "doas". OpenBSD has a lot of new stuff throughout the codebase. No need for adding a bloated dependency (e.g. Rust) just because you want to re-implement "yes" in a "memory-safe language" when you probably have no reasons to.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

JuniperMesos 11mo ago

I'd prefer it if all software was written in languages that made it as easy as possible to avoid bugs, including memory-safety bugs, regardless of whether it seems like it has a large attack surface or not.

pdimitar 11mo ago

I view `uutils` as a good opportunity to get rid of legacy baggage that might be used by just 0.03% of the community but has to sit there and it impedes certain feature adding or bug fixing. F.ex. `sudo-rs` does not support most of what the normal `sudo` does... and it turned out that most people did not need most of `sudo` in the first place. Less code leads to less bugs.