You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
130 lines
5.7 KiB
130 lines
5.7 KiB
11 months ago
|
<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||
|
<html lang="en">
|
||
|
<head>
|
||
|
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
|
||
|
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
|
||
|
|
||
|
<!-- Enable responsiveness on mobile devices-->
|
||
|
<!-- viewport-fit=cover is to support iPhone X rounded corners and notch in landscape-->
|
||
|
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1, viewport-fit=cover">
|
||
|
|
||
|
<title>Julio Biason .Me 4.3</title>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<!-- CSS -->
|
||
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/print.css" media="print">
|
||
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/poole.css">
|
||
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/hyde.css">
|
||
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=PT+Sans:400,400italic,700|Abril+Fatface">
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
</head>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<body class=" ">
|
||
|
|
||
|
<div class="sidebar">
|
||
|
<div class="container sidebar-sticky">
|
||
|
<div class="sidebar-about">
|
||
|
|
||
|
<a href="https://blog.juliobiason.me"><h1>Julio Biason .Me 4.3</h1></a>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<p class="lead">Old school dev living in a 2.0 dev world</p>
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<ul class="sidebar-nav">
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
<li class="sidebar-nav-item"><a href="/">English</a></li>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<li class="sidebar-nav-item"><a href="/pt">Português</a></li>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<li class="sidebar-nav-item"><a href="/tags">Tags (EN)</a></li>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<li class="sidebar-nav-item"><a href="/pt/tags">Tags (PT)</a></li>
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
</ul>
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
<div class="content container">
|
||
|
|
||
|
<div class="post">
|
||
|
<h1 class="post-title">Commented Link: Mitigating Memory Safety Issues in Open Source Software</h1>
|
||
|
<span class="post-date">
|
||
|
2021-02-18
|
||
|
|
||
|
<a href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/tags/links/">#links</a>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<a href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/tags/google/">#google</a>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<a href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/tags/safety/">#safety</a>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<a href="https://blog.juliobiason.me/tags/rust/">#rust</a>
|
||
|
|
||
|
</span>
|
||
|
<p>Initially announced on HackerNews as "Google to Pay Developers to Port Their Code
|
||
|
to Rust" <a href="https://security.googleblog.com/2021/02/mitigating-memory-safety-issues-in-open.html">on this
|
||
|
post</a>,
|
||
|
what is actually going on is not quite what it seems.</p>
|
||
|
<p>And it seems this time HackerNews comments <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26179032">actually got what it actually
|
||
|
means</a>.</p>
|
||
|
<span id="continue-reading"></span>
|
||
|
<p>But let me surmise this.</p>
|
||
|
<p>First of all, the funding is not going to open source developers so they can
|
||
|
secure their applications, or look for alternatives that seem more
|
||
|
secure. Google will fund another company -- ISRG -- for them to write new
|
||
|
versions of some code. So, even if the idea is pretty good, it won't translate
|
||
|
into offering help to the authors so they could still work on their project; the
|
||
|
money will all go to someone else, to provide patches.</p>
|
||
|
<p>This "someone will provide patches" always remind me of a talk by Brett Cannon
|
||
|
on a DjangoCon. "You see this little puppy, so cute, but what I see is 10 years
|
||
|
of walks, giving food and picking its crap."<sup class="footnote-reference"><a href="#1">1</a></sup> So, while ISRG will provide
|
||
|
patches for improving open source projects using memory safe languages, there is
|
||
|
no word about "and continue to make things work". Sure it is nice to have a
|
||
|
safety patch in some other language landing in your project, but who will take
|
||
|
care of it in the next version? And the next one? ISRG or the original author --
|
||
|
whose, again, got absolutely nothing in the first place?</p>
|
||
|
<p>Second, there is this line:</p>
|
||
|
<blockquote>
|
||
|
<p>The ISRG's approach of working directly with maintainers to support rewriting
|
||
|
tools and libraries incrementally falls directly in line with our perspective
|
||
|
here at Google.</p>
|
||
|
</blockquote>
|
||
|
<p>What feels strange about it is that we know, for a long time, that Google does
|
||
|
not work for the common good; it works for itself (and that's ok for the
|
||
|
company). But what if the secure way of some project does not fall in the exact
|
||
|
"perspective" of Google? Will they fork it? Accept that their perspective isn't
|
||
|
the right way?</p>
|
||
|
<p>For example, recently Cryptography replaced a core element to use Rust -- which
|
||
|
totally makes sense in a secure project. The problem is that some people, using
|
||
|
some non-mainstream architectures, <a href="https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/issues/5771">saw their builds
|
||
|
failing</a>. Now, again, it makes
|
||
|
sense for something that enforces security to use a memory safe language, but
|
||
|
what that was the proposed solution by ISRG -- which, again, aligns with the
|
||
|
perspective of Google -- and the author decided that portability is more
|
||
|
important?</p>
|
||
|
<p>In the end, it feels like Goog is trying another way to take hold on open source
|
||
|
projects for their own purposes and not actually caring about helping end users
|
||
|
to have a better internet experience.</p>
|
||
|
<hr />
|
||
|
<div class="footnote-definition" id="1"><sup class="footnote-definition-label">1</sup>
|
||
|
<p>Paraphrased, I can't really recall the actual quote.</p>
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
||
|
</body>
|
||
|
|
||
|
</html>
|