Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
Doesn’t this imply a software design issue where it is just written in a way to have these security bugs and patching them 1 by 1 is not what should be done but the whole design should change which can eliminate full classes of security bugs without any particular patches being necessary?
This is what the Rust advocates have been trying to say for a decade now. But C enthusiasts would always chime in that those bugs were just caused by careless devs and a real C programmer is fine.
Rust eliminates some bug classes, but we don't even know yet how many of these vulns would've been prevented by using Rust.

It's also possible that we'd need even more architectural changes to avoid such bugs.

The idea of a microkernel suddenly becomes more appealing...

A 'real' C programmer probably is fine .... but that's like 1% of the population of developers outputting C programs.

And now you have AI that's learned from the other 99% so nothing's changing anytime soon.

loading story #50377853
loading story #50376865
loading story #50376913
Sort of, but one has to be pragmatic.
Isn't it said that with enough users and use cases, every bug becomes a feature that someone depends on. I'd bet that a lot of these vulnerabilities are the result of intentional trade offs in design.
The only thing I know is that if I wanted to learn how to program, I have thousands of tutorials on the Internet and Youtube teaching everything from if/else to data structures and big O.

But if I wanted to learn software design and architecture, I'd probably not even know where to start.