Even as a Rust user, I'd prefer to reduce the attack surface by having a userspace network stack. Tanenbaum gets the last laugh.
Of course, once it's in userspace you can write it in whatever language you want. But as a network-facing component, yes, it should preferably be written in a memory-safe language as much as possible, since it's extremely high-risk and the first target for remote adversaries.
Why is this certain? Nobody has written a wifi stack, or even a single wifi driver, for Linux. Until they do, we won't know if Rust will help with these kinds of security flaws.
> promoting kernel Rust will not fix anything, howsoever personally gratifying it may feel to engage in it.
I totally agree, you'd need to fix the broken things to fix anything, hopefully without writing more broken things on your way there and back, and ideally in a way that is unambiguous and easy to parse, unlike this sentence.
joosters|3 years ago
[ ] Catchy logo
Poor effort, only 50% of the way there. (No marks awarded for a working exploit, marketing doesn't care about that)
Edit: Marks should also be deducted for a lack of scary text claiming that everyone should panic.
gw99|3 years ago
Scaevolus|3 years ago
ncmncm|3 years ago
fsflover|3 years ago
ncmncm|3 years ago
[deleted]
kibwen|3 years ago
Of course, once it's in userspace you can write it in whatever language you want. But as a network-facing component, yes, it should preferably be written in a memory-safe language as much as possible, since it's extremely high-risk and the first target for remote adversaries.
phendrenad2|3 years ago
jwandborg|3 years ago
I totally agree, you'd need to fix the broken things to fix anything, hopefully without writing more broken things on your way there and back, and ideally in a way that is unambiguous and easy to parse, unlike this sentence.
pjmlp|3 years ago
The old one has plenty of them to show off due to typical memory corruptions handling network packets.