Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing.

Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
27 Posts 18 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
    maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
    maxine@hachyderm.io
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

    Link Preview Image
    Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

    Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

    favicon

    (www.phoronix.com)

    maxine@hachyderm.ioM hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH txt_file@chaos.socialT sundew@beige.partyS luxliquida@critter.cafeL 9 Replies Last reply
    1
    0
    • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

      Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

      Link Preview Image
      Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

      Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

      favicon

      (www.phoronix.com)

      maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
      maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
      maxine@hachyderm.io
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      Do not trust projects which incidentally end up replacing licenses that put minimal requirements on corporations with anti-labour licenses such as MIT/BSD type.

      fabio@zirk.usF tris@chaos.socialT bms48@mastodon.socialB 3 Replies Last reply
      0
      • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

        Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

        Link Preview Image
        Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

        Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

        favicon

        (www.phoronix.com)

        hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
        hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
        hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        @maxine yes

        hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH hipsterelectron@circumstances.run

          @maxine yes

          hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
          hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
          hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          @maxine wish i could boost this five times

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

            Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

            Link Preview Image
            Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

            Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

            favicon

            (www.phoronix.com)

            hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
            hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
            hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            @maxine also coreutils 9.11 increased performance by 50%-600% on major tools like cat so the perf claims need to be redrawn anyway

            hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH hipsterelectron@circumstances.run

              @maxine also coreutils 9.11 increased performance by 50%-600% on major tools like cat so the perf claims need to be redrawn anyway

              hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
              hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
              hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              @maxine oops that would be 1500% https://circumstances.run/@hipsterelectron/116438776604523528

              hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

                Link Preview Image
                Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

                Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

                favicon

                (www.phoronix.com)

                txt_file@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                txt_file@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                txt_file@chaos.social
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                @maxine What I do not understand: Why invest so much energy in removing coreutils and other GPLed stuff when they rely on GPLed Linux (kernel) anyway?

                torb@hachyderm.ioT T 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                  Do not trust projects which incidentally end up replacing licenses that put minimal requirements on corporations with anti-labour licenses such as MIT/BSD type.

                  fabio@zirk.usF This user is from outside of this forum
                  fabio@zirk.usF This user is from outside of this forum
                  fabio@zirk.us
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  @maxine 100%. I used to be neutral on the license issue but this is quickly becoming a red flag.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • txt_file@chaos.socialT txt_file@chaos.social

                    @maxine What I do not understand: Why invest so much energy in removing coreutils and other GPLed stuff when they rely on GPLed Linux (kernel) anyway?

                    torb@hachyderm.ioT This user is from outside of this forum
                    torb@hachyderm.ioT This user is from outside of this forum
                    torb@hachyderm.io
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    @txt_file @maxine Could maybe be because Linux is using an older version of the GPL license that corporations like better?

                    rustynail@floss.socialR 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                      Do not trust projects which incidentally end up replacing licenses that put minimal requirements on corporations with anti-labour licenses such as MIT/BSD type.

                      tris@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                      tris@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                      tris@chaos.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      @maxine IIRC, uutils has LLM code contributions from people who don't understand what they're doing

                      tris@chaos.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • txt_file@chaos.socialT txt_file@chaos.social

                        @maxine What I do not understand: Why invest so much energy in removing coreutils and other GPLed stuff when they rely on GPLed Linux (kernel) anyway?

                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        tanavit@toot.aquilenet.fr
                        wrote last edited by
                        #11

                        @txt_file

                        In a chain, if one link is unfree, the whole chain is unfree.

                        It is very difficult to use the linux kernel alone.

                        @maxine

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                          Do not trust projects which incidentally end up replacing licenses that put minimal requirements on corporations with anti-labour licenses such as MIT/BSD type.

                          bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                          bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                          bms48@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #12

                          @maxine I would not go so far as to categorise permissive licenses in that way, even though Apple, Inc. are my economic free rider. The reality is always more nuanced than that. But for the sake of argument, I feel MPL-2.0 is the way to go for what I publish outside of FreeBSD or existing BSD/MIT projects I work on.

                          flesh@transfem.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • tris@chaos.socialT tris@chaos.social

                            @maxine IIRC, uutils has LLM code contributions from people who don't understand what they're doing

                            tris@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tris@chaos.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tris@chaos.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #13

                            @maxine proof: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/8538
                            There could be more but I'm not in a mood to dig them all
                            cc: @hipsterelectron

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                              Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

                              Link Preview Image
                              Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

                              Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

                              favicon

                              (www.phoronix.com)

                              sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundew@beige.party
                              wrote last edited by
                              #14

                              @maxine I love copyleft licensing, but I don't think memory safety bugs are irrelevant, nor do I think people trying transition to memory safe languages are automatically bad actors.
                              😞

                              stf@chaos.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • bms48@mastodon.socialB bms48@mastodon.social

                                @maxine I would not go so far as to categorise permissive licenses in that way, even though Apple, Inc. are my economic free rider. The reality is always more nuanced than that. But for the sake of argument, I feel MPL-2.0 is the way to go for what I publish outside of FreeBSD or existing BSD/MIT projects I work on.

                                flesh@transfem.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                                flesh@transfem.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                                flesh@transfem.social
                                wrote last edited by
                                #15

                                @bms48@mastodon.social @maxine@hachyderm.io Classifying BSD/MIT as anti-labour in general is debatable. That said, in particular contexts like this, they sure can be.

                                kelpana@mastodon.ieK 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • sundew@beige.partyS sundew@beige.party

                                  @maxine I love copyleft licensing, but I don't think memory safety bugs are irrelevant, nor do I think people trying transition to memory safe languages are automatically bad actors.
                                  😞

                                  stf@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  stf@chaos.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  stf@chaos.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #16

                                  @sundew @maxine most of the utils in coreutils have no remote attack surface and run without suid bit, so neither local privilege escalation is an issue. so the threat model really does not include memory-safety in any important way. thus the whole rewrite coreutils in rust for security is utter bullshit.

                                  sundew@beige.partyS 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • maxine@hachyderm.ioM maxine@hachyderm.io

                                    Consider the following: rust rewrites of projects like coreutils exist purely to remove copyleft licensing. The supposed security and performance gains are irrelevant, and while memory safety is important, logic bugs don’t suddenly cease to exist just because it was written in Rust.

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    Ubuntu Rust Coreutils Audit Revealed 113 Issues, Ubuntu 26.10 Aims For "100% Rust Coreutils"

                                    Ahead of tomorrow's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS release, Canonical published a blog post today outlining the state of Rust Coreutils for its premiere in this long-term support (LTS) version

                                    favicon

                                    (www.phoronix.com)

                                    luxliquida@critter.cafeL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    luxliquida@critter.cafeL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    luxliquida@critter.cafe
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #17

                                    @maxine Tangential, the Phoronix forums seem to be absolutely flooded with transphobia and other bigotry... I know "don't read the comments" is common sense, but they really need moderators over there 🤦🏻‍♀️

                                    maxine@hachyderm.ioM 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • luxliquida@critter.cafeL luxliquida@critter.cafe

                                      @maxine Tangential, the Phoronix forums seem to be absolutely flooded with transphobia and other bigotry... I know "don't read the comments" is common sense, but they really need moderators over there 🤦🏻‍♀️

                                      maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      maxine@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      maxine@hachyderm.io
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #18

                                      @luxliquida I resent using Phoronix as a source here but I didn’t find another quickly, but yes, the community of that site is an absolute cesspit. Has been as long as I remember.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • stf@chaos.socialS stf@chaos.social

                                        @sundew @maxine most of the utils in coreutils have no remote attack surface and run without suid bit, so neither local privilege escalation is an issue. so the threat model really does not include memory-safety in any important way. thus the whole rewrite coreutils in rust for security is utter bullshit.

                                        sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundew@beige.party
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #19

                                        @stf @maxine

                                        I think memory safety issues in any program can still be very bad news. One example:
                                        https://www.csoonline.com/article/549634/vulnerability-in-widely-used-strings-utility-could-spell-trouble-for-malware-analysts.html

                                        Sure, a safety issue in a webserver is worse than in a utility, but I'd still like all the software I use to be memory-safe.

                                        Even if you're not doing full-on malware analysis, I'd like to know it's safe to run basic utilities on files downloaded from the internet without having to worry about RCE.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH hipsterelectron@circumstances.run

                                          @maxine oops that would be 1500% https://circumstances.run/@hipsterelectron/116438776604523528

                                          hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #20

                                          @maxine also forgot about the c2rust ones https://circumstances.run/@hipsterelectron/116453862836059542

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups