The Python Paradox (2004)
201–210 of 275 posts
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is to C what systemd is to /etc/rc. Both C and /etc/rc are defining characteristics of old-school Unix culture, so it kind of makes sense even just on account of that that folks who hate systemd also hate Rust. What puzzles me is that OpenBSD people seem to be quite actively opposed to Rust too. They are the project that disables hyperthreading for security reasons, runs ld to relink the kernel after every boot…
If you want to understand how it might be motivated by security, just read the LKML threads around Rust - the Rust developers’ claims are at times pretty wild, and in my experience (after 20 years in infosec), they tend to have a relatively narrow view of “safe”. I am expecting new vulnerabilities to pop up from developer’s misunderstanding of what Rust actually guarantees, especially in the same memory space as the…
The project could start moving critical software to Rust. They could even write their own crates for this purpose, or fork others’ crates to rule out supply chain attacks.
None of this would be unprecedented for the OpenBSD project. They have forked Apache, OpenSSL, they maintain their own SSH client and server. What would be new is that now all of this would not be happening in C but in another language.
Edit: I don’t even think that the above has to be done in Rust. It could be done in any other modern language. But you also mention the complexity of Rust. In what way do you see it as an infosec problem?
To me it appears that the complexity of Rust is good. The limitations that the language puts on your code give you pain before compilation, not afterwards. It makes you do work that avoids certain kinds of memory and logic bugs.
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's mostly due to socio-historical accident. It's not because the languages are particularly difficult or arcane, it's mainly because people don't already know it, and people don't like to learn to do things differently I beg to differ. I studied compsci BSC at an eastern european university. The professors decided to test that theory and decided to introduce programing to everyone in our program through Haskell.…
That's a response to a slightly different question. Your answer makes it clear that exposing students to a language isn't enough to make them take up a language. The original point was that Haskell isn't per se inaccessible.
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's sort of outdated. Python now has type hints, protocol oriented programming support, and is quite fast (for what it is). This wasn't the case back in the day but it's all there now.
Python might have nice features, but it also has terrible features. Like using dicts for everything. It's not enough to allow good practices, you have to prevent (or at least reduce) bad practices.
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is "not as used" but it has a following who hype it to the point that I've avoided taking time to relearn it just due to the strange vibes I get from their community. These people once mentioned, on twitter, that people who hate systemd are like reactionaries (as in, politically far right), as if a choice of init is a correlative of political ideology. When you view others' preferences for fucking software as so…
>These people once mentioned, on twitter, that people who hate systemd are like reactionaries (as in, politically far right), as if a choice of init is a correlative of political ideology. When you view others' preferences for fucking software as so important to your world view that they might as well be nazis[0], you can tell your priorities are not in order. I hate that everything is politically-coded nowadays, but…
Also, "conservatism" meaning "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is NOT equivalent to political conservatism at all. Conservatives all the time advocate for changes that contradict tradition all the time. Just look at the zoning debates in the US, none of the "keeping X neighborhood sfh" people who argue for it because of "preservation" want to minimize parking to the point they can't fit their f-150s anymore, which dwarf the trucks of the 50s. It has a veneer of "respecting tradition" but they don't really care about tradition in the strict sense. It's like most political ideologies, it centers on a set of values and ideas with justifications that come later.
The left really is the same honestly. While "progressivism" has a nice summary as being "for political change" in some respects, they too respect tradition and history when it fits their aims. It's more correct to say that the sides really have a set of values and ideas that are central, without some overarching central tenet or explanation.
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#206I love learning new languages because of learning, not because it's cool. That's why learning Rust shows more about the person than being on a hype train. This is one of the best indications for hiring if I'd hire someone.
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Haskell and Idris are beautiful and powerful, but inaccessible to most software engineers. I don't see any fundamental reason why that should be the case. It seems to me that while it's true that most engineers would have a hard time navigating these languages today, it's mostly due to socio-historical accident. It's not because the languages are particularly difficult or arcane, it's mainly because people don't al…
> it's mostly due to socio-historical accident. It's not because the languages are particularly difficult or arcane, it's mainly because people don't already know it, and people don't like to learn to do things differently I beg to differ. I studied compsci BSC at an eastern european university. The professors decided to test that theory and decided to introduce programing to everyone in our program through Haskell.…
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is to C what systemd is to /etc/rc. Both C and /etc/rc are defining characteristics of old-school Unix culture, so it kind of makes sense even just on account of that that folks who hate systemd also hate Rust. What puzzles me is that OpenBSD people seem to be quite actively opposed to Rust too. They are the project that disables hyperthreading for security reasons, runs ld to relink the kernel after every boot…
If you want to understand how it might be motivated by security, just read the LKML threads around Rust - the Rust developers’ claims are at times pretty wild, and in my experience (after 20 years in infosec), they tend to have a relatively narrow view of “safe”. I am expecting new vulnerabilities to pop up from developer’s misunderstanding of what Rust actually guarantees, especially in the same memory space as the…
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#209So what are some present day choices for a language that can serve this people differentiator role? And yet is practical? How about F#?
Re: The Python Paradox (2004)
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is "not as used" but it has a following who hype it to the point that I've avoided taking time to relearn it just due to the strange vibes I get from their community. These people once mentioned, on twitter, that people who hate systemd are like reactionaries (as in, politically far right), as if a choice of init is a correlative of political ideology. When you view others' preferences for fucking software as so…
Genuine question: Maybe the pro systemd people meant the word reactionary in it's non-left/right definition? From Wikipedia: "In political science, a reactionary or a reactionist is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society" [0] I've heard people use 'reactionary' to mean "doesn't want things to change", or "wants things to go back to the wa…
It's like saying Nickelback's "Woke Up This Morning" is Classic Rock because you never heard of the Rolling Stones "Start Me Up".