Re:A survey of BSD kernel vulnerabilities [pdf]
by pjmlp on Friday July 28, 2017 @03:42AM
(#14872656)
The problem is more political than technical.
There have been operating systems written in mostly safe systems programming languages since the 60s, 10 years before C was born.
Burroughs created ESPOL and NEWP, IBM did their RISC research with PL/8, Xerox had Mesa/Cedar, UK Royal Navy Algol-68RS, and many many others with Midori's System C# being the latest example.
If there isn't political will, there isn't the motivation to overcome any technical hurdles that might appear.
Now even with Microsoft adopting a Linux compatibility layer we are reaching the age of UNIX mono-culture, and its dependency to C for kernel development.
So the question is who will have the political will to break this reality, and drive the technical adoption regardless of the hurdles that might appear along the way.
There have been operating systems written in mostly safe systems programming languages since the 60s, 10 years before C was born.
Burroughs created ESPOL and NEWP, IBM did their RISC research with PL/8, Xerox had Mesa/Cedar, UK Royal Navy Algol-68RS, and many many others with Midori's System C# being the latest example.
If there isn't political will, there isn't the motivation to overcome any technical hurdles that might appear.
Now even with Microsoft adopting a Linux compatibility layer we are reaching the age of UNIX mono-culture, and its dependency to C for kernel development.
So the question is who will have the political will to break this reality, and drive the technical adoption regardless of the hurdles that might appear along the way.