linux-kernel - Re: Rust kernel policy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4e316b01634642cf4fbb087ec8809d93c4b7822c.camel@tugraz.at>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 08:03:02 +0100
From: Martin Uecker <uecker@...raz.at>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Miguel Ojeda
 <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, 
 rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds
 <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ksummit@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Rust kernel policy

Am Mittwoch, dem 19.02.2025 um 06:39 +0100 schrieb Greg KH:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 07:04:59PM -0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 04:58:27PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > 
...
> 
> 
> I'm all for moving our C codebase toward making these types of problems
> impossible to hit, the work that Kees and Gustavo and others are doing
> here is wonderful and totally needed, we have 30 million lines of C code
> that isn't going anywhere any year soon.  That's a worthy effort and is
> not going to stop and should not stop no matter what.

It seems to me that these efforts do not see nearly as much attention
as they deserve.

I also would like to point out that there is not much investments
done on C compiler frontends (I started to fix bugs in my spare time
in GCC because nobody fixed the bugs I filed), and the kernel 
community also is not currently involved in ISO C standardization.

I find this strange, because to me it is very obvious that a lot more
could be done towards making C a lot safer (with many low hanging fruits),
and also adding a memory safe subset seems possible.

Martin