Re:Comparing Parallel Rust and C++
by thr0w__4w4y on Thursday November 07, 2019 @08:09PM
(#21479169)
> This is a common misconception — safety and security are different things.
IMO this could either be read as:
- "The misconception that safety and security are different things is common", i.e. they are not different, but the misconception is common.
- "The misconception [above, that safety and security are not different things] is common - safety and security /are/ two very different things."
I hope you mean the latter (safety != security). I consult in security (hardware and software), and I came to security by way of high-availability, high-consequence systems.
I've seen many safe, but insecure systems. I don't know if it's possible to have an unsafe, secure system (I doubt it?) but absolutely, safety != security. There is an overlap of sorts, but to say that these 2 "are not different things" is why I have lots of work.
Wow, sorry, I'll get off my soapbox. I'm still not sure if perhaps we're in "violent agreement" as the saying goes.
IMO this could either be read as: - "The misconception that safety and security are different things is common", i.e. they are not different, but the misconception is common. - "The misconception [above, that safety and security are not different things] is common - safety and security /are/ two very different things."
I hope you mean the latter (safety != security). I consult in security (hardware and software), and I came to security by way of high-availability, high-consequence systems.
I've seen many safe, but insecure systems. I don't know if it's possible to have an unsafe, secure system (I doubt it?) but absolutely, safety != security. There is an overlap of sorts, but to say that these 2 "are not different things" is why I have lots of work.
Wow, sorry, I'll get off my soapbox. I'm still not sure if perhaps we're in "violent agreement" as the saying goes.