So lets hope that those folks do not declare a „panic“ as 
„Denial of Service“ as they do right now when we segfault.
Look for example here:

https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-32034

That is a CVE because the router becomes too slow. Which is a DoS.
The pspp cves are also not claiming that there is a security risk:

https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-48188

It is just „Denial of Service“ 

But I guess it might be easier to gracefully exit the
code parsing stage and to continue with rust. 

> Am 13.06.2025 um 23:13 schrieb Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu>:
> 
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 12:02 PM Friedrich Beckmann 
> <friedrich.beckm...@posteo.de> wrote:
> > Am 13.06.2025 um 20:53 schrieb Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu>:
> > 
> > I don't know yet whether it will be possible to wrap the new engine to work 
> > with the existing GUI. If it is, it will take some effort.
> > 
> > I started by working on a system file reader implementation, which is 
> > almost done. There is also a basic implementation of the output layer, and 
> > a basic implementation of a syntax parser. And several tests. None of it is 
> > really ready and I don't know when it will be, but when it is, it won't 
> > have segfaults.
> 
> As far as I understood it Rust will catch for example an out of range index 
> access on an array and end up in „panic“. I would consider a „panic“ the same 
> as „DoS“ although it is not a segfault. Do you think you can for example 
> write the parser to always end up in recoverable errors?
> 
> Rust programs, like any kind of program, can have bugs. Out-of-range indexes 
> and other kinds of panics are just examples of them. The important 
> distinction is that a Rust program never[*] risks executing arbitrary code or 
> accessing arbitrary data because of malicious or unlucky input. Those are the 
> security problems that people automatically generate and submit by the 
> truckload, and that security authorities rank as the biggest risks.
> 
> [*] With some qualifications; you can write "unsafe" Rust that does this. 
> Ordinary "safe" Rust does not.


Reply via email to