The Linux kernel is open source and is by far the most widely used operating system in the world. Vulnerabilities in Linux are golden tickets, so people are looking for them all the time.
Aha, so Linux is a victim of its own success and open source development with C is fundamentally flawed from a security perspective. You've convinced me. I agree with you, C is not adequate to the task of developing secure open source software.
Nope, I just occupy the real world as opposed to being siloed in the deluded fantasy you wish the world to be. Where are these mythical programmers that will finally write secure programs in C? Why have they done such a terrible job so far? When will they improve? When will they deliver? When will you deliver anything to back your claims?
There is not inversion of proof, invalid or otherwise. You've failed to back your claim that "no tools help" or that these mythical perfect programmers will solve all the world's software security problems. Show me evidence to back your claims. If you cannot, then what use are you?
So you can't demonstrate anything to support your claim. You've had every chance and every opportunity and yet you show nothing. Your claims are plainly baseless and a waste of everyone's time.
What studies have shown to date is that better tools are needed. Luckily, better tools are available.
Show me a study which backs your claim that no tools can help. If you can't show me any research to support your position then this is just more baseless pontificating.
Which isn't true. Overall the new system (including preconditioning the battery) reduces the charge time by about 33%. What used to take 60 minutes can now be done in 40 minutes. The 250 kW charge rate is only maintained up until about 16% state of charge.
It's still a very good improvement, but don't believe the hype.
Then you should abandon Chromium now. The fact that you use it (or any Chrome based browser) now is what emboldens Google to do this sort of thing in the first place.
And I use an adblocker, advise everyone I know to use adblockers, and would switch to a different browser if Chrome were to block adblockers.
Adblockers work better in Firefox. You should advise everyone to switch to Firefox now instead of waiting. uBlock Origin uses WebAssembly in Firefox for better performance, but Chrome does not allow this yet.
That's a "no" on the data then. So much for your alleged expertise. I asked you to deliver and you failed. You don't deliver because you can't deliver.
It's amusing that even in the complete absence of any evidence to support your fanciful ideas you're still a true believer in your articles of faith.
I agree. You aren't arguing anything. You're just making baseless claims with no data to back it. Show me a study to support the claim that your mythical perfect programmer will solve all the problems. Show me the evidence which demonstrates that you are correct.
Microsoft has shown you a study which contradicts your claim with real world data. Microsoft is the more credible source here.
You might as well complain about any library written in any other language that any Rust program links to. As a complaint it makes no sense. What surprises anyone that worse tools are used to build better tools. This has been true for the entire history of software development. What will you argue next? That C isn't really C because actually it's all machine code in the end, and that machine code isn't really machine code because that's not how the processor works internally?
The question was what language is Rust written in. The answer is that it's written in Rust.
I do not know how many vulnerabilities would exist if we included everything that uses the MS ecosystem as this does with Debian
So you're saying Debian's development, packaging, and distribution model is fundamentally flawed from a security point of view? That doesn't inspire me to use Debian.
There were 775 Windows 10 vulnerabilities in 2018
There were 255 Windows 10 vulnerabilities in 2018. I don't know where you're getting 775 from. You're probably confusing it with the "all time leaders" vulnerability counts. If we look at the all time leaders, Debian is number 1 and "Linux Kernel" is number 2.
Microsoft has shown you a study which backs my claims. One of their specific recommendations is that they need to move to languages with better memory safety (like Rust).
P.S.: No. Why do you ask? I am not even driving a car because I know I am a bad driver.
Ah, this then is one of the causes of your narrow world view. You need to get out in the world more. Broaden your horizons, learn some life skills, and develop some better experience. When you keep yourself narrow it's easy to end up captured by ideological positions. Without those broader experiences you have nothing to counterbalance and make obvious the faulty thinking.
When you gain some more worldliness you'll see the fault in your perspective. Good luck!
Slashdot Mirror
Both.
The Linux kernel is open source and is by far the most widely used operating system in the world. Vulnerabilities in Linux are golden tickets, so people are looking for them all the time.
Aha, so Linux is a victim of its own success and open source development with C is fundamentally flawed from a security perspective. You've convinced me. I agree with you, C is not adequate to the task of developing secure open source software.
Who knew C coders were so sensitive with feelings so easily hurt. Harden up, boy.
Junk effort, kid. Try harder.
Nope, I just occupy the real world as opposed to being siloed in the deluded fantasy you wish the world to be. Where are these mythical programmers that will finally write secure programs in C? Why have they done such a terrible job so far? When will they improve? When will they deliver? When will you deliver anything to back your claims?
It's time to put up or shut up, kid.
There is not inversion of proof, invalid or otherwise. You've failed to back your claim that "no tools help" or that these mythical perfect programmers will solve all the world's software security problems. Show me evidence to back your claims. If you cannot, then what use are you?
Don't cry just because C has let you down. Recognize Cs failings and move on to a better language.
So you can't demonstrate anything to support your claim. You've had every chance and every opportunity and yet you show nothing. Your claims are plainly baseless and a waste of everyone's time.
its not hard to write secure c
And yet 70 percent of all security bugs are memory safety issues.
If only there was some kind of language which was designed to reduce memory safety bugs.
Maybe try reading it. I know reading is hard for you but do try.
If you use established Linux kernel core coders, you get completely different numbers compared to using newbie kernel driver coders.
Do you? Is that why the top 6 products with the most vulnerabilities in 2018 were all Linux products? Is that why the Linux kernel had the second highest number of vulnerabilities in 2017?
C coders don't seem to be that great at security.
No tools can help here.
What studies have shown to date is that better tools are needed. Luckily, better tools are available.
Show me a study which backs your claim that no tools can help. If you can't show me any research to support your position then this is just more baseless pontificating.
It recharges 1000 miles of driving in an hour.
Which isn't true. Overall the new system (including preconditioning the battery) reduces the charge time by about 33%. What used to take 60 minutes can now be done in 40 minutes. The 250 kW charge rate is only maintained up until about 16% state of charge.
It's still a very good improvement, but don't believe the hype.
i would abandon chromium in a second
Then you should abandon Chromium now. The fact that you use it (or any Chrome based browser) now is what emboldens Google to do this sort of thing in the first place.
It should be pointed out that the new API being proposed will actually make adblocking more efficient.
But adblockers aren't inefficient. If Chrome's interested in efficiency then it should enable WebAssembly for add-ons, like Firefox does.
Really, the goal here seems to be to make adblocking safer and more efficient, better for users, not to kill it.
That presupposes that adblockers are inefficient now. But, as linked to in the summary, simple measurements show that isn't true.
And I use an adblocker, advise everyone I know to use adblockers, and would switch to a different browser if Chrome were to block adblockers.
Adblockers work better in Firefox. You should advise everyone to switch to Firefox now instead of waiting. uBlock Origin uses WebAssembly in Firefox for better performance, but Chrome does not allow this yet.
That's a "no" on the data then. So much for your alleged expertise. I asked you to deliver and you failed. You don't deliver because you can't deliver.
It's amusing that even in the complete absence of any evidence to support your fanciful ideas you're still a true believer in your articles of faith.
I am not actually arguing
I agree. You aren't arguing anything. You're just making baseless claims with no data to back it. Show me a study to support the claim that your mythical perfect programmer will solve all the problems. Show me the evidence which demonstrates that you are correct.
Microsoft has shown you a study which contradicts your claim with real world data. Microsoft is the more credible source here.
You might as well complain about any library written in any other language that any Rust program links to. As a complaint it makes no sense. What surprises anyone that worse tools are used to build better tools. This has been true for the entire history of software development. What will you argue next? That C isn't really C because actually it's all machine code in the end, and that machine code isn't really machine code because that's not how the processor works internally?
The question was what language is Rust written in. The answer is that it's written in Rust.
I am an actual expert
You really aren't. You're just making a baseless claim and doing nothing to refute Microsoft's study.
Show me a study which supports your claim that these mythical perfect programmers will solve everything. Show me evidence. Show me data. I am waiting.
I do not know how many vulnerabilities would exist if we included everything that uses the MS ecosystem as this does with Debian
So you're saying Debian's development, packaging, and distribution model is fundamentally flawed from a security point of view? That doesn't inspire me to use Debian.
There were 775 Windows 10 vulnerabilities in 2018
There were 255 Windows 10 vulnerabilities in 2018. I don't know where you're getting 775 from. You're probably confusing it with the "all time leaders" vulnerability counts. If we look at the all time leaders, Debian is number 1 and "Linux Kernel" is number 2.
And what language is Rust written in
Rust is written in Rust, and before that it was written in OCaml. It's been self-hosted for quite some time.
You are dead wrong though
Microsoft has shown you a study which backs my claims. One of their specific recommendations is that they need to move to languages with better memory safety (like Rust).
Show me a study which backs your claims.
P.S.: No. Why do you ask? I am not even driving a car because I know I am a bad driver.
Ah, this then is one of the causes of your narrow world view. You need to get out in the world more. Broaden your horizons, learn some life skills, and develop some better experience. When you keep yourself narrow it's easy to end up captured by ideological positions. Without those broader experiences you have nothing to counterbalance and make obvious the faulty thinking.
When you gain some more worldliness you'll see the fault in your perspective. Good luck!
Seriously
There is nothing serious about your perspective. You have been captured by ideology. It has confused you.