Post B5z5297qOqxIhRVLM0 by raito@nixos.paris
 (DIR) More posts by raito@nixos.paris
 (DIR) Post #B5z3McPH2jq9OfI7qC by mildsunrise@tech.lgbt
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       the uutils situation was very unsurprising to me, because the first people to attempt a rewrite of coreutils would be those who know enough programming to be confident, but not enough systems programming to realize the challenge at hand and the respect it requires. reminds me of the 10-yo Alba, thinking she was a good programmer :neofox__w:
       
 (DIR) Post #B5z3qQ75JXL7xOzh3Y by mildsunrise@tech.lgbt
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I wonder how many of these CVEs would've been avoided if people would've, y'know, looked at the (C) source of an existing implementation
       
 (DIR) Post #B5z5297qOqxIhRVLM0 by raito@nixos.paris
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mildsunrise i don't think people can understand what the fuck is going in a C codebase wrt to path safety
       
 (DIR) Post #B5z529M1Y8IXPQ8fSK by mildsunrise@tech.lgbt
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @raito yeah it's a genuine question, maybe the answer is zero
       
 (DIR) Post #B5z52AsfsE0e8yQFzE by raito@nixos.paris
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mildsunrise if this was true, people would read systemd source code which contains many good stuff on chase_path and so on
       
 (DIR) Post #B5z52FlPieAlHu41rc by evey@chaos.social
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mildsunrise @raito Pretty sure they explicitly don't look at it because of licensing issues. given uutils in non GPL.