Re:Windows has a new wormable vulnerability, with no patch
by andrewflnr on Wednesday March 11, 2020 @05:23PM
(#22550855)
It is not the case that every Turing complete language allows certain inputs to cause the program to break the bounds of the language's semantics and go rampaging through its simulator. That's what unsafe means in the context of memory vulnerabilities. Yes, Rice's Theorem is cool, but so are sound and complete type systems.
Re:Windows has a new wormable vulnerability, with no patch
by msla on Thursday March 12, 2020 @09:02AM
(#22556326)
A "sound and complete type system" can't guarantee termination, and being a Rust zealot won't change that.
Re:Windows has a new wormable vulnerability, with no patch
by andrewflnr on Thursday March 12, 2020 @09:19AM
(#22556482)
Correct. Fortunately that has nothing to do with memory safety. And where did you get the idea I was a Rust zealot?
Re:Windows has a new wormable vulnerability, with no patch
by msla on Friday March 13, 2020 @12:23PM
(#22568560)
It has everything to do with memory safety.
Re:Windows has a new wormable vulnerability, with no patch
by andrewflnr on Friday March 13, 2020 @05:09PM
(#22570900)
You don't even need a type system to eliminate memory unsafety. Show me the memory unsafety in lambda calculus. (and don't forget that, as you said, we're talking about languages, not runtimes)
Doesn't matter what kinds of checks you put in. It might matter what kind of runtime you have, but a runtime isn't a language, is it? We're talking about the language, and any language sufficiently expressive to allow you to say "loop until you are done" instead of "loop precisely 20 times" is inherently unsafe.