The Curiosity rover might be doing ok, but the many places that have my social security number are not. I care more about the latter than the former.
Rust is not immune to security vulnerabilities. And at the end of the day, social engineering will steal more data than "hacking the mainframe". Why break in when you can just ask to be let in?
OpenBSD has a great security track record because they resist excessive change and prefer simplicity. For those who want to add Rust to the core of FreeBSD my primary question: is it really necessary? Or is it just because a bunch of Rustaceans want to?
I want to point out one more thing: Rust is not a simple language by any stretch. It's equal to in complexity to C++ (yet without decades of established "good practices"). It is much preferable to have an easier to understand core and move the complexity outward—for improved stability and robustness. The core OS by nature of what it does needs to access raw resources in an "unsafe" manner. Rust kernel code will be littered with unsafe blocks and unnecessary complexity.
Sure.
But running on OpenBSD doesn't solve application level vulnerabilities. And sure - OpenBSD may help limit the ability of an attacker to leverage one vuln into compromising the entire system. But if the original attack was important enough, that's cold comfort.
Bfha... the link is a thread by the FreeBSD devs. Stop it with this language evangelist strawman.
I don’t think it was your intention, but what you just said makes me want to applaud more heavy-handed efforts to make the switch away from C/C++.
So COBOL everywhere it is. Let it be written, let it be done.