Rust is not immune to security vulnerabilities. And at the end of the day, social engineering will steal more data than "hacking the mainframe". Why break in when you can just ask to be let in?
OpenBSD has a great security track record because they resist excessive change and prefer simplicity. For those who want to add Rust to the core of FreeBSD my primary question: is it really necessary? Or is it just because a bunch of Rustaceans want to?
I want to point out one more thing: Rust is not a simple language by any stretch. It's equal to in complexity to C++ (yet without decades of established "good practices"). It is much preferable to have an easier to understand core and move the complexity outward—for improved stability and robustness. The core OS by nature of what it does needs to access raw resources in an "unsafe" manner. Rust kernel code will be littered with unsafe blocks and unnecessary complexity.
Sure.
But running on OpenBSD doesn't solve application level vulnerabilities. And sure - OpenBSD may help limit the ability of an attacker to leverage one vuln into compromising the entire system. But if the original attack was important enough, that's cold comfort.
Bfha... the link is a thread by the FreeBSD devs. Stop it with this language evangelist strawman.
I don’t think it was your intention, but what you just said makes me want to applaud more heavy-handed efforts to make the switch away from C/C++.
So COBOL everywhere it is. Let it be written, let it be done.
> According to research, up to 850 billion lines of COBOL code are currently running in nearly 30,000 organizations, typically in critical production environments. 90 percent of Fortune 500 companies rely on it. Never has there been this much COBOL in circulation and the volume is only likely to increase for the foreseeable future.
https://www.chrly.pt/en/2023/06/14/cobol-the-immortal-langua...
E.g. at one end of the spectrum you have Python where you have to write explicit tests for typos and type errors.
At the other end of the spectrum you have formal verification languages like Dafny that may not require any tests to be written.
Rust is somewhere in-between. It has a very strong type system and lots of features that make memory errors and business errors less likely than in most other languages. You still need some tests, but not as many as with C/C++, Python, JavaScript, etc.
It's much more feasibly to be secure by construction.
E.G. Curiosity rover is doing just fine running on millions of lines of C.
https://vdocuments.mx/monitoring-the-execution-of-space-craf...
If it's going to impact OS stability and decrease performance and portability of the humble, dependable, simple C, it doesn't belong in the core. C is better than Rust for OS development.