Hacker News Reader

Comment by z3phyr | Hacker News Reader

Rust is pretty useful against memory based bugs, and it is prudent that new projects take advantage of it. But this in no way fixes the headache of security, because (1) almost all of the existing infrastructure code depends on C (2) New classes of bugs will eventually emmerge, some partly unfixable by software solution.

View on HN

>New classes of bugs will eventually emmerge, some partly unfixable by software solution.

Sure Rust, ADA and such don't remove all classes of bugs, but they can reduce the attack surface considerably, giving you more time to focus on the remaining security bugs.

And maybe people will invent software solutions that reduce the attack surface even more.

Assembly is a fast car with no security features. C is a sportscar with a seatbelt. Rust is a sportscar with a seatbelt, airbags, ABS, ESC and emergency breaking.

Of course you can still crash and die, it's just that you're less likely to do so.

> Assembly is a fast car with no security features. C is a sportscar with a seatbelt.

Given the ways you can trigger UB there is no difference between Assembly and C with regards to safety.

Just type "undefined behavior" here. I'm sure you have the time.

I know what you mean, however I think C did bring down the amount of bugs compared to assembly, just by making code easier to read and higher level abstractions available.

It's still not much though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com