<story><title>Heartbleed in Rust</title><url>http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-in-rust</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>MichaelGG</author><text>As the offending commentor, I apologize. Particularly to the Rust team for generating this negative publicity, and to the person I replied to, for asserting a lie.&lt;p&gt;I misunderstood Heartbleed, exactly as Ted summarizes. I&amp;#x27;ve no excuse other than commenting when I shouldn&amp;#x27;t. I am happy though to have my idiocy corrected as I&amp;#x27;ll comment better in the future.&lt;p&gt;The rest of the original thread does point out that I &lt;i&gt;did&lt;/i&gt; examine every security advisory published by Microsoft over a year or two span, and that, from the descriptions, Rust would have prevented basically every serious (code exec) one. (Notable exceptions being failures in the sandboxed code loading, similar to the various Java in browser bugs.)</text></comment>
<story><title>Heartbleed in Rust</title><url>http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-in-rust</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>simias</author><text>I mostly agree with the premise: logic errors are always going to be there, at least until the compiler is an IA strong enough to catch them for us (and by then we probably won&amp;#x27;t need coders anyway...). There&amp;#x27;s no silver bullet, bad coders are always going to produce. And I also don&amp;#x27;t like it when people claim that bug X or vulnerability Y wouldn&amp;#x27;t have happened if they had been technology Z, they&amp;#x27;re just begging for that type of post.&lt;p&gt;That being said I&amp;#x27;m a bit more skeptical of this part: &amp;quot;code no true C programmer would write : heartbleed :: code no true rust programmer would write :: (exercise for the reader)&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;If I look at the examples in the acticle, the C version doesn&amp;#x27;t look that terrible and contrieved to me. I wonder what the author means by &amp;quot;Survey says no true C programmer would ever write a program like that, either.&amp;quot; That looks like a lot of C code I&amp;#x27;ve read, there&amp;#x27;s nothing particularly weird about it.&lt;p&gt;On the other hand the rust version looks very foreign to me (and I&amp;#x27;ve been writing quite a lot of rust lately). You basically have to go out of your way to create the same issue.&lt;p&gt;I guess my point is that while it&amp;#x27;s true that as long as there&amp;#x27;ll be coders there&amp;#x27;ll be bugs and security vulnerabilities it doesn&amp;#x27;t mean we shouldn&amp;#x27;t try to make things better. And in my opinion Rust makes it much more difficult to shoot yourself in the foot than plain C.</text></comment>