As the offending commentor, I apologize. Particularly to the Rust team for generating this negative publicity, and to the person I replied to, for asserting a lie.
I misunderstood Heartbleed, exactly as Ted summarizes. I've no excuse other than commenting when I shouldn't. I am happy though to have my idiocy corrected as I'll comment better in the future.
The rest of the original thread does point out that I did examine every security advisory published by Microsoft over a year or two span, and that, from the descriptions, Rust would have prevented basically every serious (code exec) one. (Notable exceptions being failures in the sandboxed code loading, similar to the various Java in browser bugs.)
I misunderstood Heartbleed, exactly as Ted summarizes. I've no excuse other than commenting when I shouldn't. I am happy though to have my idiocy corrected as I'll comment better in the future.
The rest of the original thread does point out that I did examine every security advisory published by Microsoft over a year or two span, and that, from the descriptions, Rust would have prevented basically every serious (code exec) one. (Notable exceptions being failures in the sandboxed code loading, similar to the various Java in browser bugs.)