News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk. Parent comment

Re:Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk by Veserv on Friday November 01, 2024 @12:11AM (#42013995)
There are plenty with good security track records, formal specifications, formal proofs of various security properties, and decades of deployments.

SCOMP, GEMSOS, INTEGRITY-178, seL4.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk by ArtixFox on Friday November 01, 2024 @01:06AM (#42014199)
god seL4 everywhere would be awesome.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk by kyleee on Friday November 01, 2024 @02:34AM (#42014548)
Don’t forget Temple OS
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk by burnt-resistor on Friday November 01, 2024 @05:50AM (#42015388)
> Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Feds: Critical Software Must Drop C/C++ by 2026 or Face Risk by burnt-resistor on Friday November 01, 2024 @05:47AM (#42015373)
seL4 is far more rigorous that the others. The problem today is a widespread lack of understanding of software engineering approaches and tools for formal verification of source model verification, compiler toolchains, and binaries, and also a lack of diligence and effort in implementing rigorous practices.
[ Parent | on HN ]