4 ms·
What are you hoping it will achieve?
by groundzeros2015 8mo ago
What are you hoping it will achieve?
- irishcoffee 8mo agoThe internet went down because cloudflare used a bad config... a config parsed by a rust app. One of these days the witch hunt against C will go away.
- random_mutex 8mo agoA panic in Rust is easier to diagnose and fix than some error or grabage data that was caused by an out of bounds access in some random place in the call stack
- hypeatei 8mo agoThe internet didn't go down and you're mischaracterizing it as a parsing issue when the list would've exceeded memory allocation limits. They didn't hardcode a fallback config for that case. What memory safety promise did Rust fail there exactly?
- groundzeros2015 8mo agoI think the point is memory bugs are only one (small) subset of bugs.
- Abstract_Typist 8mo agoThe conventional wisdom is ~70% of serious security bugs are memory safety issues. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/CSAC_TAC_Recommendations-Memory-Safety_Final_20231205_508.pdf https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/CSAC_TAC_Re...
- groundzeros2015 8mo agoSecurity bugs - and not bad security processes, are a small subset of bugs.
- wat10000 8mo agoA service going down is a million times better than being exploited by an attacker. If this is a witch hunt then C is an actual witch.
- groundzeros2015 8mo agoWhy can it be exploited? I’ve configured my OS so my process is isolated to the resources it needs.
- wat10000 8mo agoWhat language is your OS written in?
- groundzeros2015 8mo agoIt’s written in C I’m glad you asked. Do you have any exploits in the Linux process encapsulation to share? Surely your not suggesting that the Rust compiler never produces exploitable code?
- wat10000 8mo agoI probably don’t have such an exploit, since you’re probably running something up to date. There have been many in the past. I doubt the last one to be fixed is the last one to exist. If your attitude is that getting exploited doesn’t matter because your software is unprivileged, you need some part of your stack to be unexploitable. That’s a tall order if everything is C. You can get exploitable code out of any compiler. But you’re far more likely to get it from real-world C than real-world Rust.
- groundzeros2015 8mo ago> you need some part of your stack to be unexploitable. Kernel level process isolation is extremely robust. > If your attitude is that getting exploited doesn’t matter because your software is unprivileged It’s not that exploits doesn’t matter. It’s that process architecture is a stronger form of guarantee than anything provided by a language runtime. I agree that the place where rust is most beneficial is for programs that must be privileged and that are likely to face attack - such as a web server. But the idea that you can’t securely use a C program in your stack or that rust magically makes process isolation irrelevant is incorrect.