[yjftsjthsd-h]

Oh, that's easy; all you have to do is argue that it wasn't a representative sample. Just because 70% of security problems in Chromium are memory-safety problems doesn't mean that arbitrary project X has the same proportion or risks. Chromium is a very specific kind of application (network client that almost exclusively talks to untrusted servers, does media decoding, large, runs as an application, long-running), so it's plausible that its issues are unique.

However, it gets a lot harder to argue that it's just Chromium when Microsoft found the same thing: https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-70-percent-of-all-se... At that point, the strongest argument shifts from "Chromium is the outlier" to "my code is the outlier". And that's... possible to defend (ex. the OpenBSD folks have a track record that says they can write safe C), but certainly harder.

[staticassertion]

TBH it's only easy if you're ignorant. It's quite obvious to anyone who's informed or educated at all that using Rust would address major security issues. It sucks that people require so much convincing.