Comment by musicale
1 month ago
Unix-nature loves malicious argument and code injection vulnerabilities, while C brings its own set of issues such as buffer overflows.
1 month ago
Unix-nature loves malicious argument and code injection vulnerabilities, while C brings its own set of issues such as buffer overflows.
Are you referring to bash when you say Unix-nature?
Bash and C are both old and flawed early implementations that brought great ideas.
Bash can be replaced by a much safer language that retains its shell nature (easily able to weave together many Unix programs).
I was replying to GP.
You could certainly replace bash and traditional Unix shells with something else. My favorite attempt is scsh (though mainly for the "acknowledgements" section of its reference manual.)
But I'm in favor of a Unix/Linux command shell and scripting language that has type and taint checking for command arguments, and which differentiates between code and data. Typed data pipes could be nice as well.
However, Unix/Linux isn't (yet) designed for those features. For example exec() doesn't type check command arguments.