New NSA/CISA Report Again Urges the Use of Memory-Safe Programming Language (theregister.com)
- Reference: 0178226786
- News link: https://it.slashdot.org/story/25/06/29/1956256/new-nsacisa-report-again-urges-the-use-of-memory-safe-programming-language
- Source link: https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/27/cisa_nsa_call_formemory_safe_languages/
> The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) this week published guidance urging software developers to adopt memory-safe programming languages. "The importance of memory safety cannot be overstated," the [2]inter-agency report says ...
>
> The CISA/NSA report revisits the rationale for greater memory safety and the government's calls to adopt memory-safe languages (MSLs) while also acknowledging the reality that not every agency can change horses mid-stream. "A balanced approach acknowledges that MSLs are not a panacea and that transitioning involves significant challenges, particularly for organizations with large existing codebases or mission-critical systems," the report says. "However, several benefits, such as increased reliability, reduced attack surface, and decreased long-term costs, make a strong case for MSL adoption."
>
> The report cites how Google by 2024 managed to reduce memory safety vulnerabilities in Android to [3]24 percent of the total . It goes on to provide an overview of the various benefits of adopting MSLs and discusses adoption challenges. And it urges the tech industry to promote memory safety by, for example, advertising jobs that require MSL expertise.
>
> It also cites various government projects to accelerate the transition to MSLs, such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Translating All C to Rust ( [4]TRACTOR ) program, which aspires to develop an automated method to translate C code to Rust. A recent effort along these lines, dubbed [5]Omniglot , has been proposed by researchers at Princeton, UC Berkeley, and UC San Diego. It provides a safe way for unsafe libraries to communicate with Rust code through a Foreign Function Interface....
>
> "Memory vulnerabilities pose serious risks to national security and critical infrastructure," the report concludes. "MSLs offer the most comprehensive mitigation against this pervasive and dangerous class of vulnerability."
"Adopting memory-safe languages can accelerate modern software development and enhance security by eliminating these vulnerabilities at their root," the report concludes, calling the idea "an investment in a secure software future."
"By defining memory safety roadmaps and leading the adoption of best practices, organizations can significantly improve software resilience and help ensure a safer digital landscape."
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/27/cisa_nsa_call_formemory_safe_languages/
[2] https://media.defense.gov/2025/Jun/23/2003742198/-1/-1/0/CSI_MEMORY_SAFE_LANGUAGES_REDUCING_VULNERABILITIES_IN_MODERN_SOFTWARE_DEVELOPMENT.PDF
[3] https://security.googleblog.com/2024/09/eliminating-memory-safety-vulnerabilities-Android.html
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/03/darpa_c_to_rust/
[5] https://www.usenix.org/publications/loginonline/memory-safety-merely-table-stakes
Government trolling (Score:3)
It's like they're doing this just to troll Bjarne Stroustrup, and it's working because he keeps losing his shit every single time they do. Well done!
That reminds me. (Score:3)
How is ADA doing nowadays?
How is ADA doing nowadays? (Score:2)
I think the Americans with Disabilities Act, got defunded as part of the Big Beautiful Bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe thoughts and prayers will help.
Fuck CISA (Score:2)
Fuck CISA and this bullshit.
Those paper-shuffling-middle-management-fucks don't have a clue.
Translating old code to... (Score:2)
...modern memory-safe languages is a great idea in theory.
In practice, it's really hard.
I believe that the problem will eventually be solved, but it will take a lot of work.
Translation is only the first step, verifying correctness under all conditions is harder, and if the old code has bugs, they should be detected and removed in the process. This is even harder.
I wish the researchers luck
What do they know (Score:2)
What do they know with their well-reasoned conclusions based on years of research⦠people who have formed identities around being memory management wizards that have huge egos and refuse to believe that human fallibility is a real factor in large complex systems rather than a matter of personal accountability deeply feel otherwise.
Flip side (Score:2)
Just about the only way we're going to be able to take control of hardware we own and use software we want (rather than gov't/corp approved) is by exploiting security flaws left by, amongst other things, unsafe code.
Maybe urge the use of good coders instead? (Score:2, Insightful)
That would accomplish someting. This will not.
Re: (Score:2)
Except there is plenty of evidence collected over a few years now that using memory safe languages does in fact improve the situation re: bugs caused by silly memory use errors. Even when you have good coders. So how about all those good coders you want also use memory safe languages? That would make things even better.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, there is not. There are fake claims to that effect, but they are only claims. They have no scientifically sound basis and they are generally easily identifiable as misinterpretation of the data.
People that make "silly memopry use errors" are incompetent. They remain incompetent when using other languages. Of how do you think all those PHP or JavaScript security problems come into being?
Re: (Score:2)
I think mandating stricter languages or higher skilled developers won't matter anyway. If it did, Ada would still have been the mandatory language for all (or most) government used software. Or supposed to be.
Rules will be bent at tiny corners for budget reasons, then bent a little more at the next budget meetings, and the next, and soon everything's SNAFU again.
Besides, memory safety is a good thing and I thought support for Rust by Linus showed it was on the right track. Until I read that Rust also has op
How about a Linux distro (Score:2)
Written completely from the ground up (including the kernel) all completely in rust, call it Rusty Linux
Re: How about a Linux distro (Score:2)
Yes, it's totally going to work, without any unsafe code.
Re: (Score:2)
> call it Rusty Linux
Or LinOxidized?
Re: (Score:2)
Now we have two distros written completely in rust :D
Re: (Score:3)
Well there is Redox which is a Rust based OS. But even in Linux there are efforts to use Rust for certain things in the kernel and also outside. I doubt anyone wants to rewrite for the sake of rewriting but if there is code which is especially vulnerable or important for security then it's a candidate to consider using Rust instead of C.
Re: (Score:2)
There is the [1]Asterinas [github.com] project: a kernel completely written in Rust and with a Linux-compatible ABI -- being able to run Linux binaries.
Unsafe Rust is limited to a small portion of the whole kernel.
[1] https://github.com/asterinas/asterinas