rustsec VS compiler-team

cargo-audit is a simple Cargo tool for detecting vulnerable Rust crates. You can install it with cargo install cargo-audit, use cargo audit and you’re done! Any vulnerable crates will appear below, like so:

Further we use cargo-auditable and cargo-audit as part of both our pipeline and regular scanning of all deployed services. This makes our InfoSec and Legal super happy since it means they can also monitor compliance with licenses and patch/update timings.

Yeah your decade old single header libs get so many audits by comparison.

https://github.com/RustSec/rustsec/tree/main/cargo-audit

https://mozilla.github.io/cargo-vet/

cargo is not npm

PSA: before filing CVEs for other people's projects, file an issue with https://rustsec.org instead

Historically, such serious bugs get communicated broadly and addressed very quickly via security advisory blog posts and on https://rustsec.org.

For known vulnerabilities we have the rustsec vulnerability database. You could have a look over there for inspiration. There's also the related cargo-audit for checking dependencies for known vulnerabilities.

Would be cool if this was also reported to https://rustsec.org/ that way cargo audit could pick up and alert the users about it.

P.S. I also made scanning binaries 5x faster in the latest release of cargo audit.

Thanks to cargo and the community, project maintenance is straightforward in rust. You'll need to install cargo-outdated and cargo-audit:

Use the automated tools to assist you in the maintenance of your projects: rustfmt, clippy, cargo update, cargo outdated and cargo-audit.

> Also, why aren't we size-sorting fields already?

We are for struct/enum fields. https://camlorn.net/posts/April%202017/rust-struct-field-reo...

There's even an unstable flag to help catch incorrect assumptions about struct layout. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/457

Are you talking about https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688 ? I think that issue provides a lot of interesting context for this specific improvement.

And mips64, which rustc recently dumped support for after their attempt to extort funding/resources from Loongson failed:

https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/648

This is the biggest problem with the LLVM mentality: they use architecture support as a means to extract support (i.e. salaried dev positions) from hardware companies.

GNU may have annoyingly-higher standards for merging changes, but once it's in there and supported they will keep it for the long haul.

See https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688

The work has been going on for some time now and it seems we are quite close to it being enabled as a default for nightly builds, I am super thrilled upwards of 20% faster clean builds and possibly more are on the horizon. Hope everything works out without triggering some unseen ICE. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/681 Edit: If you want to discuss this feature reach out on Zulip

I'd recommend reading the MCP[1] they linked regarding the decision as well as their target tier policy [2].

They are dropping tier 1 support for Win 7 and Win 8. That means they are no longer going to guarantee that the project builds on those platforms and passes all tests via CI.

As long as it is feasible they will probably keep CI runs for those platforms and if interested parties step up and provide sufficient maintenance support, it will remain tier 2. i.e a guarantee that it builds on those platforms via CI but not necessarily that all features are supported and guaranteed via passing tests.

If interested parties can provide sufficient maintenance that all tests continue passing, it will be tier 1 in all but name. However the rest of the development community won't waste their time with issues like Win 7 and 8's partial support for UTF-8.

And once CI stops being feasible for the compiler team to host, it'll drop down to tier 3. If there's sufficient interest from the community towards maintaining these targets, in practice you should see comparable support to with tiers 1 or 2 however now any CI will be managed externally by the community and the compiler team will stop worrying about changes that could break compilation on those targets.

TLDR: They aren't saying "it'll no longer work" but rather "if you want it to stay maintained for these targets, you have to pitch in dev hours to maintain it and eventually support the infrastructure to do this because we don't see a reason to continue doing this". So if you care for these targets, you'll have to contribute to keep it maintained.

[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/651

(The already broken) XP support was removed almost 3 years ago: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/378