tbh I don't know enough about rust or the whole field of software development to give an authoritative answer, but if you don't know much about rust, this might help you.

in general, rust is great for pretty much anything c is great for. you can do raw memory manipulation in unsafe blocks if you want, but you write memory safe code by default. at present, rust is definitely slower than c, but there's no inherent reason that it has to be so; mainly it's just the consequence of being a new and immature language.

one neat thing you can do with rust is build safe interfaces to the c libraries that you know and love for a relatively small performance penalty. I am writing a toy graphics application in rust, and it is so much nicer than bare OpenGL, although there are some serious pain points with library maturity.

it can also be a decent substitute for problems you might solve in C# / Java / other statically-typed languages, although it is a bit more strict and explicit than those.

the main things I can think of that rust makes hard are applications where you really don't want static typing (web dev, scripting, etc.) or you have a need to use a lot of specific libraries that you don't feel like writing interfaces for.