Re:“Rewrite It in Rust” Considered Harmful? [pdf]
by Verdex on Wednesday May 24, 2023 @06:40PM
(#36064756)
> Security of technology is really a process
> But we can probably rebuild 90% of the existing world in a "Safer" manner right no
I strongly agree with this mindset. The only caveat I would offer is that some architectural structures that c and c++ allow probably don't amend themselves to fixing even if you can detect them.
Although just like you can write any language horribly, I think you can write almost any language well.
It's hard to see how tools that allow you to do that can be a bad thing. I'm certainly not going to be paying to rewrite everything from the ground up in rust or otherwise.
Security of technology is really a process, not a boolean. "Memory Safe" doesn't mean "Safe", and "Not the current crop of Memory Safe" languages doesn't mean "Unsafe". There's so much we can do with the tools we have right now to help with current codebases and apps, too many people seem to have the idea you have to do a ground up rewrite using the latest and greatest language, or you're an idiot and/or lazy.
Honestly, the whole world isn't going to be rewritten in rust tomorrow, imagine the time and effort that would take and all the other errors a ground-up rewrite of well-tested systems would cause. But we can probably rebuild 90% of the existing world in a "Safer" manner right now. We should be promoting that too, and not let perfection be the enemy of better.