RustBelt: Securing the Foundations of the Rust Programming Language¶
Jung, Jourdan, Krebbers, & Dreyer. (2018). RustBelt: Securing the Foundations of the Rust Programming Language: Securing the foundations of the Rust programming language. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 1-34.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Property Rights
- Computer science: Capability-based access control, object ownership of mutable state, and resource-acquisition disciplines (such as Rust's ownership-and-borrowing model) enforce who may use, mutate, or delegate a resource, preventing the concurrent-access analogue of the tragedy of the commons — uncontrolled shared mutable state and the data races it produces.
This sourceFormal safety proof for Rust's ownership-and-borrowing model, in which a single owner holds the right to mutate state and aliased mutation is rejected; supports treating Rust ownership as an enforced exclusive entitlement preventing data races.
- Computer science: Capability-based access control, object ownership of mutable state, and resource-acquisition disciplines (such as Rust's ownership-and-borrowing model) enforce who may use, mutate, or delegate a resource, preventing the concurrent-access analogue of the tragedy of the commons — uncontrolled shared mutable state and the data races it produces.
Domain-specific¶
- Type System
- Linear and affine types (Rust's ownership and borrow system) track how many times a value may be used and who currently holds access to it, statically preventing data races and use-after-free errors — a guarantee that other safe languages buy at runtime with a garbage collector, and that static program verification can also supply, as RustBelt does by proving Rust's unsafe library internals sound in a separation logic
This sourceEstablishes that Rust's ownership and borrowing discipline statically rules out use-after-free and data races without a garbage collector — and, being itself a machine-checked separation-logic soundness proof for Rust's unsafe library internals, that static verification can supply the same guarantee.
SupportedVerified against the source
- Linear and affine types (Rust's ownership and borrow system) track how many times a value may be used and who currently holds access to it, statically preventing data races and use-after-free errors — a guarantee that other safe languages buy at runtime with a garbage collector, and that static program verification can also supply, as RustBelt does by proving Rust's unsafe library internals sound in a separation logic
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:b93be6ddebc8 · see in the full table