This has been, and typically is, implemented. There are various ways to ensure your stack doesn't thrash your data, and this is one of them. Why Toyota hasn't i

This has been, and typically is, implemented. There are various ways to ensure your stack doesn't thrash your data, and this is one of them. Why Toyota hasn't is not something I can answer, but the principle that the article describes is well-known. As for the last part of the article, there are ways to get around this issue when using operating systems, too. Some of them depend on certain hardware features being present, of course, and what should be inferred from this is that, where such protection features are critical, hardware should be picked accordingly. Edit: I've seen a lot of posts here blaming C and the unmanaged runtimes. While a managed runtime can provide some amount of protection, it's worth noting that: * It requires a MMU. These aren't smartphones folks. An MCU with a MMU isn't cheap. * In the absence of correct memory management from the kernel (and that also requires a MMU!), it's perfectly possible to smash data regions with overgrown stacks, even on managed runtimes. * You can achieve a good amount of protection using special compiler features. That requires no special hardware support.