So when the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) announced they were doubling down on their efforts to persuade software manufacturers to abandon "memory-unsafe" programming languages such as C and C++, it came as no surprise.
[...]
The CISA is insisting that this be done. Or, at the least, companies must come up with roadmaps for moving their existing codebases by January 1st, 2026. The CISA argues that the long-term benefits in terms of reduced vulnerabilities and improved security outweigh the initial investment.
I guess this is never gonna happen for Bitcoin. Too much a risk to change the codebase at this point.
Have there even been memory related bugs in Bitcoin's history?
Once something better comes along, c and c++ will go away, but they cant tell people what to do.
reply
Yeah, switching Bitcoin’s codebase to a memory-safe language at this point would be a massive risk. Bitcoin's code has been in C++ since the start, and changing that could introduce way more problems than it solves. There have been some memory-related bugs in the past, but they were pretty rare and patched quickly. Right now, Bitcoin devs are more focused on strengthening the existing C++ code rather than rewriting it all.
reply
Luckily Bitcoin is not a company and doesn't have to comply with those coercive mofos' demands.
reply
Well said!
Yes, that's right, so far bug errors have rarely been found, unless the load is too large.
reply
What about rust?
reply
plot twist: C++ will be here "forever, Laura" ;)
reply
There's one sacred rule: if the government has to push for it, being the market free to do it by itself, then it's a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible idea. So I can guarantee that C is going nowhere.
reply
reply
lol
reply