>Otherwise, it does not bode well for Rust code because any type safety glitch will be considered a vulnerability.

I mean, this is basically true. And it goes beyond type safety - there have been CVEs filed against the Rust stdlib for TOCTOU problems of a kind that the C++ stdlib is absolutely replete with (often the exact same ones in the exact same places, to the extent that comparable APIs exist) which ended up being fixed quickly in Rust and largely ignored in C++, if anyone bothered to file in the first place.

For sure does create headaches for those who need to categorize CVEs by impact, but on balance I don't think it's a bad thing for the ecosystem. Creating a culture that wants to fix soundness issues rather than mark them as WONTFIX with a line of documentation is a core principle and value proposition of Rust in the first place.

Quoting https://cor3ntin.github.io/posts/safety/

> But the borrow checker is not what makes Rust safe. Rust is safe because it decides to put correctness first by default.

> Rust is safe by culture.

Better to pay a penny to fix it today than a pound to deal with the fallout down the line.