• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Like I said, the only way you could really trust it is if you’re not using a compile to make it. You have to write a compiler directly in assembly and then use that to compile everything else.

      • mathemachristian [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        What I’m saying is there is no need to write a whole new compiler in assembly, check out the bootstrapping article I linked.

        Or, if there is some uncompomised older compiler version A, and a compromised version B built with A, then the source code for B can be fed to A to create a clean version. As in it might be hard to try to poison the supply chain now, if they haven’t already. We can’t be sure it isn’t already poisoned, but if it actually isn’t it’s possible to catch such an attack.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The key problem is knowing whether something is compromised or not though, that why you can’t use an existing compiler if you want to be sure. Meanwhile, bootstrapping involved building a minimal core in assembly and then progressively compiling the compiler using itself. That’s basically how you build a whole new compiler starting with assembly.