They Will Never Leave Linus Torvalds Alone, Rust is Just Another Way to Cause Instability and Infighting in Linux
THIS article is closely related to what we wrote above (yesterday). We decided it merits an article of its own, as being given as just an example of "Corporate Takeover" would likely miss out many points and exclude topical news. We'll give many links today
3 years ago we published a long video about the threats posed by Rust to Linux. Almost everything we said back then turned out to be true, as over time things materialised and now the 'Rusters' misuse social control media to brigade everyone else [1, 2]. GAFAM managers must be pleased, extremely happy to watch this as it unfolds (Microsoft plays a big role in this drama).
Today we see some more articles having a go at Linus Torvalds - a familiar pattern. Of course it's the 'Rusters' and provocateurs.
So why was this problem "imposed" on Linux in the first place? Mostly lobbying. GAFAM was hiding behind front groups which claimed this was the only way to make Linux secure. "CISA and co push more Rust at the cost of C," an associate said yesterday. I said "c is not controlled and coc'ed by microsoft, rust is."
"Microsoft is trying to push its CoC into as many projects as it can so as to ruin them," the associate argued. "The remaining politicians are parroting the talking points that the only way forward is through "memory safe" languages, so as to exclude the people not under the "memory safe" language projects' CoC being waved by Microsoft."
Well, this "memory safety" thing is mostly a myth, but it was pushed towards widespread (blind) acceptance by endless repetition, usually from Google and Microsoft front groups. One could dub them pressure groups. To paraphrase what we said yesterday, the very same companies that say they want this "memory safety" are actively facilitating the NSA, providing it with back doors. Say what?
The Microsoft-stacked CISA is part of the lobby [1, 2] (see especially the latter). CISA "labelled such memory safety flaws," said The Register yesterday. Here is what the official statement said: "CISA and FBI maintain that the use of unsafe software development practices that allow the persistence of buffer overflow vulnerabilities—especially the use of memory-unsafe programming languages—poses unacceptable risk to our national and economic security.[2] As such, CISA and FBI urge manufacturers to use proven prevention methods and mitigations to eliminate this class of defect while urging software customers to demand secure products from manufacturers that include these preventions. This Alert outlines proven methods to prevent or mitigate buffer overflow vulnerabilities based on secure by design principles and software development best practices."
What they fail to mention is that Rust itself adds complexity and with this complexity new flaws are introduced. Moreover, it has been shown that a lot of code written in Rust is still full of holes and new code - owing to immaturity, not just complexity - may contain more holes than the C code currently in use.
And "related to the CISA links above," the associate said, notice this new report from a Microsoft-sponsored site [1, 2]. It says: "Observers of the political process note that a successful government provides both types of workers: A bureaucrat will get the job done with ruthless efficiency as per the rule book, with disregard for political influences. But they can be slow to change, even when change is needed. The political appointees bring in fresh change with the will of the voters. So! Is the role of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) to be an agent of change? Or the keeper of the law?"
Worse yet, many are corporate puppets, such as 'former' Microsoft staff.
There's meanwhile a new video entitled "Rust Is Splitting The Linux Kernel In Half" and a viewer said that "rust is doing its job: destroying kernel community cohesion. CoC pushers still attack Tso and others who stand up for quality + freedom. rust can't get anywhere on technical merit..."
Don't say we didn't warn about it. We already identified the Rust "community" as troublemakers more than 5 years ago and we wrote about the evidence. █