Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You've missed my point entirely. This is not a plea to Chrome to rewrite their browser. My post has nothing to do with browsers.

My claim is that Chrome is an interesting case study in the most hardened user-facing C++ codebase in the world being hacked because of memory unsafety.

I also think that the strawman argument you've made is extremely weak for other reasons. This whole "insecure by design" thing is nonsense - everyone stating this seems to not understand that multitenant systems have existed for ages, under far more difficult constraints. An example - AWS Lambdas colocate your code with other companies' on the same hardware - if this were such an impossible task, that wouldn't be possible.

But again, my argument is not about browsers, or even much about languages, and is merely me pointing out an interesting case where memory unsafety was the root cause of an attack, despite great efforts.

The culmination of your message was "Let's just collectively admit it, finally - you can't write safe C++ in a codebase this complex.", that's your point. It's probably correct, but also meaningless as I mentioned, because:

a) most codebases aren't even nearly this complex

b) no one will likely write such a codebase again

So the entire "point" is just trivia. It can't be used to decide whether to program something in C++, it can't be used to decide whether to use Chrome, it's not actionable at all.

Frankly I'm peeved that a superficial comment triggered such a long discussion and monopolised the top spot in the thread instead of making space for technical explanations or more interesting discussion.

You're attempting to derive meaning from my post, which in your mind is that browsers should not use C++, where there is no such meaning.

That you have failed to do so is not my issue. Don't blame me for having an upvoted post.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact