Talk:Security of the Java software platform

Proposed merge with Criticism of Java
I have now added more general and neutral information about the security features of the Java platform to this page, in addition to the existing criticism of the security manager. I therefore propose that the suggestion to merge this page with "Criticism of Java" be removed. -- Andrewmth (talk) 03:45, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm opposed to the merger (that is, I support the tag being removed). --Article editor (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Since it's been (almost) a month since I proposed removing the tag, and nobody has objected in that time (and one person has written in support), I have gone ahead and removed the tag. I'm a relatively new editor so I hope that doesn't violate any etiquette guidelines; if it does then feel free to revert. --Andrewmth (talk) 02:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the counterparting template in Criticism of Java. Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 10:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Likeliness of memory corruption in Java programs.
Under chapter 1.1, the author states: "'This means that Java programs are significantly less likely to suffer from memory safety flaws such as buffer overflow than programs written in languages such as C which do not provide such memory safety guarantees.'" My understanding is, that this is a contradiction to the sentences before the cited one, as the JVM should prevent all attempts of memory corruption from within the Bytecode itself, by the nature of its architecture.

The only memory corruption attack vector in the JVM environment is an attack on the JVM implementation itself and not owed due to semantic errors in the Java program, right? Thus, all JVM based languages eradicate a whole category of memory corrupting exploits - like buffer overflows -, that are possible in other non runtime-checked languages. So an attacker does not target an individual program if he wants to attack a computer, but a whole class of programs that make use of an exploitable vulnerability of the JVM. Under this class of programs, the programmers are free of accountability, as they have no influence over the vulnerability with their code.

Please clarify the intention of the sentence.

Creaturo (talk) 16:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)