HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
rust-secure-code
safety-dance
Security & Privacy2019–2023
rust-secure-code / safety-dance

safety-dance

Auditing crates for unsafe code which can be safely replaced

4Distinct people
4Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
580GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Auditing crates for unsafe code which can be safely replaced

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 7:02:50 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year4 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2019-11-01 22:56:13 UTC to 2023-09-22 08:15:51 UTC.

0122019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20212022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC110
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
Second problem: sandbox aren't perfect either. It's indeed useful, as part of a defense-in-depth approach, but it's far from sufficient. Memory safety could solve the problem altogether, but then again no program is 100% memory safe, there's always some kind of primitive that uses memory-unsafe code under the hood, so it's not perfect either. The “perfect” solution would probably be: - use memory safe languages - all primitives using memory unsafe stuff should get formally verified Rust is kind of aiming at this (with things like [1] and [2]), but it's not there yet. [1]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3158154 [2]: https://github.com/rust-secure-code/safety-dance
In The WebP 0day

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.