Re:The end of the kernel Rust experiment
by NetMageSCW on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @01:10PM
(#46221197)
“by removing the nastiest class of security vulnerabilities” and “reduce the likelihood” don’t seem to be in the same neighborhood.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The end of the kernel Rust experiment
by Ygg2 on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @03:34PM
(#46223377)
In theory they are the same statement; in practice there is 0.01% chance someone wrote unsound code.
Re:The end of the kernel Rust experiment
by littlestymaar on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @01:46PM
(#46221732)
Dividing their number by 1000[1] is technically the later but in practice it's pretty much the former.
[1]: this the order of magnitude presented in the recent Android blog post: https://security.googleblog.com/2025/11/rust-in-android-move...
> Our historical data for C and C++ shows a density of closer to 1,000 memory safety vulnerabilities per MLOC. Our Rust code is currently tracking at a density orders of magnitude lower: a more than 1000x reduction.
Re:The end of the kernel Rust experiment
by brokencode on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @05:44PM
(#46225032)
If you are reducing the likelihood of something by 99%, you are basically eliminating it. Not fully, but it’s still a huge improvement.
It reminds me of this fun question:
What’s the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars? A billion dollars.
A million dollars is a lot of money to most people, but it’s effectively nothing compared to a billion dollars.