Don't forget reads and writes of /proc/self/mem! :-)

Better include Rowhammer too. Maybe Fil-C should run a test and refuse to start on any system with bad RAM or unpatched CPU errata. It could also monitor the voltage to protect against undervolting attacks. And you'll need some cosmic ray shielding too.

Of course I'm kidding, but it is absolutely the case that if you truly care about safety you need to consider more than the program source code and binary, but also the environment, including kernel and hardware. The user doesn't care if their web browser got hacked via stack buffer underflow or /dev/exynos-mem or Rowhammer; the result is the same.

▲

pizlonator an hour ago | parent [-]

Sure all of those are escape hatches that work against any memory safety tech.

Point is, Fil-C goes further than any other memory safety tech in terms of what it guards

	▲	modeless 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Fully agreed. At some point you have to draw a line and say that the rest is the responsibility of the kernel and hardware and user, and I think Fil-C drew that line in the right place.