[sebtron]

Right, I never mentioned that I am a decently experienced C developer, so of course I got my fair share of buffer overflows and race conditions :)

I have also learned some Rust recently, I find a nice language and quite pleasant to work with. I understand its benefits.

But still, Git is already a mature tool (one may say "finished"). Lots of bugs have been found and fixed. And if more are found, sure it will be easier to fix them in the C code, rather than rewriting in Rust? Unless the end goal is to rewrite the whole thing in Rust piece by piece, solving hidden memory bugs along the way.

[rrdharan]

https://access.redhat.com/articles/2201201 and https://github.com/git/git/security/advisories/GHSA-4v56-3xv... are interesting examples to consider (though I'm curious whether Rust's integer overflow behavior in release builds would have definitely fared better?).

> Unless the end goal is to rewrite the whole thing in Rust piece by piece, solving hidden memory bugs along the way.

I would assume that's the case.

[aw1621107]

> though I'm curious whether Rust's integer overflow behavior in release builds would have definitely fared better?

Based on the descriptions it's not the integer overflows that are issues themselves, it's that the overflows can lead to later buffer overflows. Rust's default release behavior is indeed to wrap on overflow, but buffer overflow checks will remain by default, so barring the use of unsafe I don't think there would have been corresponding vulnerabilities in Rust.