Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Do you run your web browser in a VM and skip security updates for it since it doesn’t matter anyway?

I know you say you’re not viewing things in black and white, but “run in a VM or don’t care about security and vulnerabilities don’t matter” is exactly that.






I’m talking specifically about tmux.

I’ve already said there are other applications I do think benefit from a memory safe rewrite.


Why is it any different? All your arguments apply there as well.

Not really.

I don’t need to access untrusted sources from tmux. I do from Firefox.

Tmux has a smaller, easier to audit code base. Browsers are large, complicated and sprawling projects. That makes browsers a much larger attack surface.

Browsers already have sandboxing and other mitigations. Tmux doesn’t. Which means there are lower hanging fruit to fix in the terminal vs web browser.

Browsers are used by more people than tmux. So it’s a juicer target for zero-days.

We also already have Rust-based multiplexers for people who are worried about memory safety. There isn’t for web browsing.

Security is a scale of risk rather than something that is black and white. At some point the scales will tip and rewriting tmux in rust makes sense. But as said earlier, we already have Rust-based multiplexers for that eventuality. Whereas the need to harden browsers is much more urgent.

Context matters when it comes to InfoSec. At this point in time, rewriting tmux in Rust offers marginal gains vs rewriting a browser in Rust.


The browser having a larger attack service is an argument for the browser being more important to run in a VM, not less.

Maybe you never expose your terminal to untrusted data, but that’s not the norm. Most people occasionally do things in their terminals like clone repositories and look at their READMEs, ssh to computers they don’t own, read email, even browse the web.

Note that I’m not arguing that tmux must be rewritten in rust for security. I’m saying that C code is virtually guaranteed to have vulnerabilities, and this is a major reason why people want to rewrite things in rust.

If you want to argue that tmux doesn’t have any vulnerabilities, I find that very unlikely, but you do you.

If you want to argue that rewriting tmux in rust isn’t worth the effort, you may be right, but you’re arguing against something I didn’t say.


This conversation is about the merits of rewriting in Rust due to memory safety.

My replies have been specifically about that those merits.

The only reason other arguments have been included is because people like to expand that scope. For example where you said (and I’m paraphrasing) that tmux isn’t free from bugs. Clearly I don’t believe that any software is 100% bug free. But that doesn’t mean that rewriting tmux in rust brings any pragmatic improvements to the table when weighed up against all the other options and concerns.


That might be what you’re talking about but it sure isn’t what I’m talking about and I never said a single word about the actual merits of rewriting vs keeping something in C.

I summarized my actual statements in the previous comment. You might infer (and quite reasonably so) a claim that a rust rewrite would be more secure. But any statement about the overall usefulness of such an endeavor is solely in your imagination.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: