Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
198 Indlæg 103 Posters 146 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net

    @lcamtuf Rustaceans are the problem, not Rust itself. theyre like a lobbing group trying explicitly to boost their future employment demand much more than prioritized on doing the right thing as engineers or for the community. much like the AI VC are "talking up their book" even if its poison for the rest of us

    rmq@toot.ioR This user is from outside of this forum
    rmq@toot.ioR This user is from outside of this forum
    rmq@toot.io
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #26

    @synlogic4242 Uutils started as someone’s personal project to learn rust, and “write a system utility” is frequently used as a basic exercise for learning. Uutils is doing exactly what it set out to do.

    It’s not the fault of uutils that Canonical is dumb.

    @lcamtuf

    synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

      The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

      Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

      But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

      https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

      PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

      klausman@mas.toK This user is from outside of this forum
      klausman@mas.toK This user is from outside of this forum
      klausman@mas.to
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #27

      @lcamtuf There's also that human habit of getting complacent about all bugs when _some_ types of bugs are either impossible or very very hard to make because of language structure and tooling.

      orb2069@mastodon.onlineO 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

        The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

        Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

        But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

        https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

        PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

        groxx@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
        groxx@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
        groxx@hachyderm.io
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #28

        @lcamtuf a related observation would probably be: why did important, security-critical edge cases get handled without enough documentation to prevent them from reoccurring?

        orb2069@mastodon.onlineO fivetonsflax@tilde.zoneF 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

          The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

          Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

          But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

          https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

          PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

          arcaik@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
          arcaik@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
          arcaik@hachyderm.io
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #29

          @lcamtuf Why do we keep calling uutils coreutils a rewrite?

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • rmq@toot.ioR rmq@toot.io

            @synlogic4242 Uutils started as someone’s personal project to learn rust, and “write a system utility” is frequently used as a basic exercise for learning. Uutils is doing exactly what it set out to do.

            It’s not the fault of uutils that Canonical is dumb.

            @lcamtuf

            synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
            synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
            synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #30

            @rmq @lcamtuf I view it as both their fault. I'm pissed that after having to deal with Copy.Fail I now have to wipe other people's butts again for them. and I worry this will happen with more frequency as more vibe-coded software spreads around

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

              The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

              Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

              But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

              https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

              PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

              E This user is from outside of this forum
              E This user is from outside of this forum
              equity7804@hostux.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #31

              @lcamtuf Hey, would you care to elaborate or point me to resources explaining why the coreutils aren't fertile ground for memory safety issues? It's the first time I heard of this

              not2b@sfba.socialN 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

                Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

                But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

                https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

                PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

                sten@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sten@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sten@chaos.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #32

                @lcamtuf Not only that, some of the utils were not command line-compatible with their non-Rust counterparts.

                Honestly, I don't understand why these utils were rewritten. They didn't need rewriting.

                m33@mastodon.socialM oblomov@sociale.networkO 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD darkuncle@infosec.exchange

                  @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf sometimes that's the only way to learn, but it's also often the most effective way to learn

                  sten@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sten@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sten@chaos.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #33

                  @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf Sure, but perhaps don't do your learning in production? 🙂

                  darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD m33@mastodon.socialM raven667@hachyderm.ioR wolf480pl@mstdn.ioW lispi314@udongein.xyzL 5 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net

                    @hyc @lcamtuf ie. be like LEGO not Death Stars

                    wonka@chaos.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wonka@chaos.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wonka@chaos.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #34

                    https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/death-star-75419 would like a word. 😇

                    @synlogic4242 @hyc @lcamtuf

                    synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • sten@chaos.socialS sten@chaos.social

                      @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf Sure, but perhaps don't do your learning in production? 🙂

                      darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                      darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                      darkuncle@infosec.exchange
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #35

                      @sten @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf sometimes you have to get burned to learn not to touch the stove 😂

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                        The coreutils Rust rewrite story is pretty funny.

                        Coreutils are tools like rm, mv, mkdir, etc. Unlike binutils, this isn't a fertile ground for memory safety bugs. But, the rewrite was completed, and in the spirit of progress, Canonical decided to switch.

                        But do you know what coreutils are a fertile ground for? Race conditions around file creation, deletion, permission setting, and so on. The original code accounted for decades of hard-learned lessons in that space. The Rust rewrite did not:

                        https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/332

                        PS. I'm not dunking on Rust. It's just that... starting over from scratch has its hidden costs.

                        inguin@nerdculture.deI This user is from outside of this forum
                        inguin@nerdculture.deI This user is from outside of this forum
                        inguin@nerdculture.de
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #36

                        @lcamtuf
                        Many of those seemingly trivial utilities are surprisingly complex: sort runs in multiple concurrent threads, "cp -a" must build a lookup table to detect hardlinks, and ps parses obscure files in /proc. There's plenty of ways to screw up that a type- and memory-safe language would catch.

                        That said, the list of CVEs in the post is really impressive. Ditching the good old GNU coreutils might have been a tad overhasty.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • wonka@chaos.socialW wonka@chaos.social

                          https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/death-star-75419 would like a word. 😇

                          @synlogic4242 @hyc @lcamtuf

                          synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
                          synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
                          synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #37

                          @wonka @hyc @lcamtuf TBF if I knew I might have to keep rebuilding my Death Star from scratch every time the Rebellion blew it up for plot reasons I'd much prefer to do it in LEGO

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • prozacchiwawa@functional.cafeP prozacchiwawa@functional.cafe

                            @lcamtuf i do find that the crates dedicated to atomic file handling and temp files, in the interest of providing a uniform platform interface aren't as good as what's reachable in c.

                            it's not a fault of the rust language per se, but writing a safe interface at that level isn't easy, so it makes sense (and is in some sense a better default) to have high level, platform neutral access here.

                            L This user is from outside of this forum
                            L This user is from outside of this forum
                            lukasz2@social.vivaldi.net
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #38

                            @prozacchiwawa @lcamtuf yeah, but coreutils is an interface for shell languages. The shell doesn't care if underlying "util" was written in C or Rust

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • sten@chaos.socialS sten@chaos.social

                              @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf Sure, but perhaps don't do your learning in production? 🙂

                              m33@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              m33@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              m33@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #39

                              @sten @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf is it really production if it's not on my machine ?

                              mikalai@privacysafe.socialM chuckmcmanis@chaos.socialC sten@chaos.socialS 3 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • m33@mastodon.socialM m33@mastodon.social

                                @sten @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf is it really production if it's not on my machine ?

                                mikalai@privacysafe.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mikalai@privacysafe.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mikalai@privacysafe.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #40

                                @m33 @sten @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf
                                yep, production is for debugging

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • sten@chaos.socialS sten@chaos.social

                                  @lcamtuf Not only that, some of the utils were not command line-compatible with their non-Rust counterparts.

                                  Honestly, I don't understand why these utils were rewritten. They didn't need rewriting.

                                  m33@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  m33@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  m33@mastodon.social
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #41

                                  @sten @lcamtuf Someone said vigorously "don't break userspace". Now we need "don't break userland" or something

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • m33@mastodon.socialM m33@mastodon.social

                                    @sten @darkuncle @ChuckMcManis @lcamtuf is it really production if it's not on my machine ?

                                    chuckmcmanis@chaos.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                    chuckmcmanis@chaos.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                    chuckmcmanis@chaos.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #42

                                    @m33
                                    I discovered at Google a tremendous laziness and lack of rigor because "well if it doesn't work or has problems we can roll it back." I came to think of it as The Google Principle and it can be more easily written as:

                                    The amount of care and thought that goes into a software change is proportional to the perceived difficulty of pushing that change into production.

                                    @sten @darkuncle @lcamtuf

                                    darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sten@chaos.socialS sten@chaos.social

                                      @lcamtuf Not only that, some of the utils were not command line-compatible with their non-Rust counterparts.

                                      Honestly, I don't understand why these utils were rewritten. They didn't need rewriting.

                                      oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                                      oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                                      oblomov@sociale.network
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #43

                                      @sten @lcamtuf

                                      MIT licensing vs GPL.

                                      (I'm not joking.)

                                      sten@chaos.socialS argv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgA 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • groxx@hachyderm.ioG groxx@hachyderm.io

                                        @lcamtuf a related observation would probably be: why did important, security-critical edge cases get handled without enough documentation to prevent them from reoccurring?

                                        orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                        orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                        orb2069@mastodon.online
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #44

                                        @groxx

                                        ...I like how you assume people read comments. It gives me hope.

                                        @lcamtuf

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • klausman@mas.toK klausman@mas.to

                                          @lcamtuf There's also that human habit of getting complacent about all bugs when _some_ types of bugs are either impossible or very very hard to make because of language structure and tooling.

                                          orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                          orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                          orb2069@mastodon.online
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #45

                                          @klausman

                                          See: Unit tests making talking about regression taboo.

                                          @lcamtuf

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper