CISA has issued an urgent alert about a critical use-after-free vulnerability in the Linux kernel, tracked as CVE-2024-1086. This vulnerability, hidden within the netfilter: nf_tables component, allows local attackers to escalate their privileges and potentially deploy ransomware, which could severely disrupt enterprise systems worldwide.

This vulnerability, hidden within the netfilter: nf_tables component, allows local attackers to escalate their privileges and potentially deploy ransomware, which could severely disrupt enterprise systems worldwide.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
      81·
      28 days ago

      Yes, that’s right. You cannot have a UAF situation unless you’re using unsafe “escape hatch” tools.

        • calcopiritus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          26 days ago

          I’ve only seen it once. And it was made specifically to trigger a compiler bug. It barely looked like rust code.

          Now tell me how someone will introduce such a bug by accident. Winning the lottery 10000 times in a row with the same number isn’t impossible either. But we are engineers, not pure math pedantics. 0.000000000000001% probability for something that happens with less frequency than once per second is impossible.

        • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
          1·
          27 days ago

          I think the idea is that it’s easier to manage your resources in C++ if you write your code using RAII. Linux is mainly C, not C++, which makes resource management a little bit more manual.

          Rust however categorically tries to stop these problems from happening in an even stronger way. You can still write bad code in any language, but it’s supposed to be a lot more difficult to get memory corruption.

        • turdas@suppo.fiEnglish
          21·
          27 days ago

          It’s not a joke. What was described above is pretty much C++'s RAII pattern, which Rust evangelists love to present as a revolutionary Rust invention. Used with smart pointers, it will help avoid use-after-frees. What it doesn’t avoid is null pointer exceptions (you can std::move a unique_ptr and still access it, it’ll just be nullptr), but those will typically “just” be a crash rather than a gaping security hole.

          That is not to say Rust doesn’t have its own innovations on top of that (notably that the compiler stringently enforces this pattern), and C++ does give you many more ways to break the rules and shoot yourself in the foot than Rust does.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldEnglish
      37·
      28 days ago

      Improbable. Everything has bugs that surface. See my other link, or look yourself. There have been plenty of security fixes for Rust. It’s not bulletproof, just like anything else, just less likely specifically for certain memory attacks to be vectors.

      • arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        102·
        28 days ago

        Everything has bugs that surface.

        This is a worthless statement. Rust is designed to help reduce the number of bugs. No one thinks Rust will completely eliminate all bugs. Your argument about fixes in the compiler or standard library or whatever applies to C as well.

        See my other link, or look yourself.

        The link you posted says nothing about Rust software having bugs, it’s about malware written in Rust exploiting bugs in other software.