12 comments

  • vlovich123 2 hours ago ago

    As a lover of Rust, ooo boy does this sound like a bad idea. The Rust compiler is not guaranteed to always output safe code against malicious inputs given that there’s numerous known soundness bugs that allow exploiting this. Unless I’m missing something this is a security nightmare of an idea.

    Also there’s reasons why eBPF programs aren’t allowed to run arbitrarily long and this just ignores that problem too.

  • bawolff an hour ago ago

    > This approach avoids the overly restricted verification requirements (e.g., program complexity constraints)

    Maybe i'm missing something, but isn't that a bad thing?

    • pjmlp an hour ago ago

      Yes, very bad, even worse when coming from supposedly security conscious programming language community.

      • NewJazz 42 minutes ago ago

        They're not in the core language group... Do these people have influence in the stdlib, compiler, prominent libraries? Kernel community?

        Why judge the whole Rust community for the choices made by one minor subgroup?

        • testdelacc1 6 minutes ago ago

          It’s a common HN trope to generalise a “community” based on a handful of people or even just one person. “See this is why I dislike the xyz community”, says a person justifying their confirmation bias.

          It’s so common that it’s not even worth calling out.

          • johnisgood a minute ago ago

            I mean, I was going to reply "take a wild guess" to him, but your message is correct, too.

            (I may come across as an Ada zealot myself.)

  • dracarys18 an hour ago ago

    We need a way to run HolyC in the kernel

    • logicchains an hour ago ago

      You can run HolyC in the kernel. Just not the Linux kernel.

  • wakawaka28 42 minutes ago ago

    These people just won't give up lol... Rust in the kernel is a terrible idea all around.