Thanks for the comment. Rust provides a way to write memory unsafe code (which I have mentioned in the article) and with that anyone can end up with Rust code that causes CVEs but that is not the default, you have to explicitly write unsafe blocks for that. The chance of developers writing unsafe code in Rust is way less compared to C/C++ where the default is unsafe. And to be fair if you take a closer look, many of those CVEs are from crates that relies on underlying C code and some other are from non memory safety issues. And as I mentioned in the conclusion Rust is not a silver bullet and it would be hard to avoid writing unsafe code atleast when consuming underlying OS/hardware stuff but Rust does drastically reduce the possibility of memory safety issues by default and makes it easier to reason about unsafe code when you have to write them
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Thanks for the comment. Rust provides a way to write memory unsafe code (which I have mentioned in the article) and with that anyone can end up with Rust code that causes CVEs but that is not the default, you have to explicitly write unsafe blocks for that. The chance of developers writing unsafe code in Rust is way less compared to C/C++ where the default is unsafe. And to be fair if you take a closer look, many of those CVEs are from crates that relies on underlying C code and some other are from non memory safety issues. And as I mentioned in the conclusion Rust is not a silver bullet and it would be hard to avoid writing unsafe code atleast when consuming underlying OS/hardware stuff but Rust does drastically reduce the possibility of memory safety issues by default and makes it easier to reason about unsafe code when you have to write them