Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Is Rust the least secure programming language? There was yet *another* massive Rust security failure... and nobody seemed surprised. Most Rust activists simply shrugged at the normalcy of it. Considering the frequency and severity of malicious code being added to the Rust Crates ecosystem... is it the least secure...

18,898 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat •via X (Twitter)

26 Kommentare

Profilbild von Dave Jones
Dave Jonesvor 1 Monat

Why the obsession with moving stuff to Rust?

Profilbild von Not a Keynesian
Not a Keynesianvor 1 Monat

I spent a lot of time coding Rust before moving back to C++. It's all security rhetoric with an ownership model enforced by the compiler that most devs just clone to get around. C++26 is more secure, IMO.

Profilbild von the_kovic
the_kovicvor 1 Monat

Npm exists so the bar for worst will always be incredibly low

Profilbild von OMF
OMFvor 1 Monat

It's more an indictment of the dependency culture in Rust, and an argument for languages with a good batteries-included stdlib (e.g. Nim). Also, a package manager WITHOUT transitive dependencies could work (like header-only libs in C).

Profilbild von Aristarchus of Samos
Aristarchus of Samosvor 1 Monat

Calling Rust "the least secure" because of third-party crate supply chain issues which affect npm, pip, and every modern package manager is peak bad-faith tech panic. Anything to keep the anti-Rust outrage machine funded.

Profilbild von Victor C
Victor Cvor 1 Monat

Definitively, I would say not just the least secure but the buggiest one. It is about how its ecosystem was built, and it is still in development. That silly idea of Rust solving memory safety issues and making your systems secure, coming from Rustaceans, is just a fallacy.

Profilbild von Geralt
Geraltvor 1 Monat

No less secure than C.

Profilbild von Ali Sherief
Ali Sheriefvor 1 Monat

NodeJS has and will always be less secure than Rust

Profilbild von John Gouin
John Gouinvor 1 Monat

Not a programmer but when Rust first came out I played around with it and I definitely didn't like it reaching out and getting packages. I think you can cache them but that ecosystem was alarming and now we see why it's a flaw not a feature.

Profilbild von Jonathan Bartlett
Jonathan Bartlettvor 1 Monat

It also just plain doesn’t live up to its safety guarantees. You can write unsafe Rust entirely without using *any* unsafe features.

Profilbild von Statutory Ape
Statutory Apevor 1 Monat

The government is telling you to use it, so of course it's insecure. They've only given bad advice since 2014.

Profilbild von 1337 h4X0r
1337 h4X0rvor 1 Monat

Rust is just compiled JavaScript but even less readable

Profilbild von Adel Bucetta
Adel Bucettavor 1 Monat

because the hard part is never just writing code, it's dealing with the complexity of real-world systems where assumptions can kill you

Profilbild von Shavix ➡️ KEL5 Gdańsk
Shavix ➡️ KEL5 Gdańskvor 1 Monat

Why didn't you make a similar video when npm had such supply chain attacks even more frequently than

Profilbild von ℕ𝕚𝕧𝕒𝕝 ℂ𝕒𝕥
ℕ𝕚𝕧𝕒𝕝 ℂ𝕒𝕥vor 1 Monat

Ok. Notice the pattern: • PHP —> WP —> plugins —> overpopularity —> target for persistent attack • JS —> Node —> npm —> NextJS — same More? Recast your question. It is not about the language itself, it is about the ecosystem and community filled contents.

Profilbild von Shoestring Lab
Shoestring Labvor 1 Monat

Crate is inherently insecure. That's a problem that no one seems to want to address.

Profilbild von Daniel Kos
Daniel Kosvor 1 Monat

People in here are really measuring Rust against node.js? I thought Rust was meant to be a robust systems level language

Profilbild von Deus Lemmus『旅鼠神』
Deus Lemmus『旅鼠神』vor 1 Monat

Simply by crates existing it is.

Profilbild von inverse.news
inverse.newsvor 1 Monat

Every language has its purposes. It's strange to obsess over Rust.

Profilbild von Mr. Tech Guy
Mr. Tech Guyvor 1 Monat

Rust is NOT the programming language. Rust is the Virus...

Profilbild von Dodo on Security 🇵🇸 🇺🇦
Dodo on Security 🇵🇸 🇺🇦vor 1 Monat

Hey LarperJournal, any word on anti-woke, based Omarchy coming with a rootshell baked into it? No? Do you need a second to ask AI what that means?

Profilbild von Rob
Robvor 1 Monat

@grok is this true?

Profilbild von Rob Stoddard 啄目鸟
Rob Stoddard 啄目鸟vor 1 Monat

So I masked the Rust compiler and Rust binaries, and now I can't install any browsers.

Profilbild von ninjaquick
ninjaquickvor 1 Monat

I think rust is a fine language - but it is definetly attracting the worst of FOSS and I can't trust it until it has multiple independent compiler projects.

Profilbild von John Gouin
John Gouinvor 1 Monat

You could of made this a little more comical..and I say this because at first I thought it was what you were doing. I heard you say at 1:06 "we had another one come in" and I thought it was BREAKING NEWS, like it just happened but then you said "from a couple of days ago".

Profilbild von FERRON
FERRONvor 1 Monat

1. Supply chain attacks in C programs are still possible, and might have even affected lots of software, see XZ Utils and Jia Tan. 2. What about npm package ecosystem, which allows lots of people to publish packages, similarly to crates . io? Also, Shai-Hulud.

Ähnliche Videos

Why is Rust different than many/most programming languages? Alice Ryhl works on Google's Android Rust team, is a Rust language team advisor, and is a core maintainer of Tokio (the most widely-used async runtime in Rust) Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 04:09 Tokio: an overview 05:11 What Alice likes about Rust 12:48 Rust for TypeScript engineers 13:51 Moving from C++ to Rust 14:34 Memory safety 18:12 Garbage collection tradeoffs 21:46 Ownership, references, and borrowing 26:59 Unsafe in Rust 31:21 Crates and Cargo 35:55 Language design and RFCs 43:02 Building new features 46:30 Editions vs. versions 49:47 Getting paid to work on Rust 51:27 Contributing to Rust 53:03 Rust in the Linux kernel 55:45 AI use cases for Rust 1:01:35 Learning Rust 1:03:54 Book recommendation Brought to you by: • Antithesis – verify your system’s correctness without human review or traditional integration tests – and avoid bugs or outages. • Sentry – application monitoring software considered “not bad” by millions of developers Three things worth knowing about Rust: 1. Rust was designed to turn implicit failures into compile errors. Where other languages allow you to forget something, Rust makes an omission into a compilation error for things like null checks, uninitialized variables, or error propagation with the ‘?’ character. If you mess something up, it’s almost certain your program will not compile. If it does, at the very least you should see a lint warning. 2. Refactoring in Rust is safe and easy, thanks to the compiler. Alice: “I change a return type or struct field, then just fix the compiler errors until the compiler stops shouting. And then once I’ve done that, I’ve updated every place I need to update.” Rust’s focus on correctness makes refactoring it more straightforward than dynamically-typed languages and Java-style typed ones are to refactor. 3. “Editions” allow Rust to make breaking changes without ‘breaking’ anyone’s code. Rust editions (2015, 2018, 2021, 2024) can be mixed freely across crates. A library on the 2021 edition works seamlessly with a binary on the 2024 edition. This is how Rust evolves syntax (like adding async/await as keywords) without forcing an ecosystem-wide migration. Thanks a lot, Alice for this great discussion! And for your work on Rust.

Gergely Orosz

52,449 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten