Kernel buffer overflow exposes iPhone 11 Pro to radio based attacks

[IGotD-]

On Wednesday, 9 December 2020 at 18:20:48 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
[...]

Not to reply your post in particular but a general reply. I 
couldn't care less about this @safe lobbyism, it really doesn't 
do anything for me. @safe is just a limitation of the features in 
D so it isn't really safe or maybe it will be somewhere in the 
distant future. Rust started this safe nonsense but in reality 
your program is as safe you make it, it's just a word that is 
being used for marketing. Java and C# are just as safe but didn't 
use that kind of marketing because programmers understood what 
they are about anyway.

Programming languages today seem to be victims of "Objects in 
mirror are closer than they appear" jargon. In reality you will 
not be safer because of that stupid sentence, which the rest of 
world don't seem to need.

I don't really care what happens to the @safe DIP as long as I 
have an easy escape from it. If you want to be safe, don't do 
what I do like changing the stack pointer in the middle of the 
execution. Which would be perfectly ok in @safe code with DIP 
1028 as changing the stack pointer is done via a assembler 
function. I don't really mind because if I mess up, it's my fault.