To download the full copy of the report, click on this link
INTRODUCTION
The modernization of legacy software systems has become a pressing issue for industries and governments worldwide. Aging codebases, written in memory-unsafe languages like C, C++, and COBOL, present significant security, reliability, and maintainability challenges. With the rise of memory-safe languages such as Rust, there is an opportunity to address these vulnerabilities and future-proof critical systems. However, the cost of rewriting and transitioning global legacy codebases to Rust is monumental, estimated to range from $17.25 trillion to $69 trillion globally, with the U.S. share ranging from $6.9 trillion to $34.5 trillion.
This paper examines the costs, scope, and benefits of transitioning legacy software to Rust, comparing it to historical efforts like Y2K which resulted in a total global cost of over $600 billion. It also evaluates alternative approaches to hardening and immunizing existing code that could achieve similar security and reliability outcomes at a fraction of the cost. The goal is to provide policymakers and industry leaders with actionable insights and recommendations to guide resource allocation and strategic decision-making.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- Transitioning to Rust provides long-term security, performance, and maintainability benefits.
- Scope and Complexity: Rewriting 500 billion to 1 trillion lines of code (LOC) globally would involve extensive effort across industries.
- Critical systems, while only 5% of the codebase, are the most expensive to rewrite, costing up to $300 per LOC.
- Moderate complexity code represents 50% of the codebase and drives the majority of costs.
- Workforce training, while necessary, represents a small fraction (<0.1%) of the total cost.
- The Cost of Transitioning to Rust: Migrating legacy codebases to Rust is projected to cost 30-100 times more than Y2K preparations. The global cost is estimated at $17.25 trillion to $69 trillion, with potential reductions to $8.63 trillion to $48.3 trillion through automation and tooling. The U.S. share ranges from $6.9 trillion to $34.5 trillion.
- Alternatives to Full Migration: Hardening or immunizing existing codebases through automated tools, runtime protections, and selective refactoring offers a significantly more cost-effective solution. These methods can achieve memory safety and reduce vulnerabilities without the need for complete rewrites. Effectively making the true actual cost negligible when compared to all other alternatives.
KEY FINDINGS
Global Legacy Codebase Scope
The global legacy codebase comprises 500 billion to 1 trillion lines of code (LOC). The U.S. accounts for 200-500 billion LOC, representing 40-50% of the total. The breakdown by language and industry shows significant reliance on memory-unsafe languages like COBOL, C, and Assembly.
Cost of Rewriting Code in Rust
The cost of rewriting and testing code in Rust varies by complexity:
Potential cost reductions of 30-50% through automation and tooling could lower global costs to $8.63-48.3 trillion and U.S. costs to $3.45-24.15 trillion.
Training and Workforce Impact
Transitioning to Rust requires training a significant portion of the developer workforce, primarily those working with legacy systems.
Training costs represent less than 0.1% of global rewriting costs, making them a small but essential investment.
Analysis: Why Rust Migration Is So Expensive
- Code Size: Transitioning involves rewriting 500 billion to 1 trillion LOC, compared to Y2K, which focuses on date-specific patches in smaller portions of the codebase.
- Scope of Work: Rust migration requires complete rewrites, testing, and refactoring, unlike Y2K, which was primarily a patching effort.
- Industries Affected: Rust migration spans all industries reliant on legacy software, including finance, healthcare, defense, and critical infrastructure.
- Long-Term Investment: While costly, Rust migration offers significant long-term benefits, including memory safety, reduced vulnerabilities, and improved performance.
- Expert Turnover: The high turnover rate of security professionals within MDR providers can lead to inconsistent service quality.
Recommendations: Hardening Code as an Alternative to Full Migration
Rather than migrating all legacy code to Rust, industries and governments can adopt cost-effective alternatives to achieve similar security and reliability outcomes:
- Automated Code Hardening: Use automated tools to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities in memory-unsafe codebases. This reduces the risk of runtime vulnerabilities without requiring a full rewrite.
- Runtime Protections: Implement runtime solutions that enforce memory safety and prevent common vulnerabilities like buffer overflows and null pointer dereferences.
- Selective Refactoring: Focus on rewriting only the most critical and high-complexity systems, which pose the greatest security risks.
- Improved Tooling and Automation: Invest in tools that can streamline refactoring and testing processes, reducing time and labor costs.
- Collaboration Between Government and Industry: Foster public-private partnerships to prioritize the modernization of critical systems, such as financial, manufacturing, and healthcare infrastructure.
Cost Comparison: Full Migration vs Hardening
Hardening code saves 80-90% of the costs of full migration while achieving comparable security and reliability benefits.
CONCLUSION
Transitioning legacy codebases to memory-safe languages like Rust is a monumental but costly initiative. While Rust offers significant long-term benefits, the global cost of $17.25 trillion to $69 trillion is a barrier to wholesale adoption. Hardening and immunizing existing codebases present a viable alternative, reducing costs by up to 90% and achieving comparable security outcomes.
Policymakers and industry leaders should prioritize critical systems and adopt a hybrid approach that combines selective migration with automated code hardening. By leveraging advanced tooling and runtime protections, the U.S. government and private sector can modernize legacy systems, improve cybersecurity, and reduce long-term maintenance costs without the prohibitive expense of rewriting all legacy code.
SOURCES
- Primary research on behalf of the author with over 20 years of experience in the cybersecurity industry
- Gartner: Multiple publications
- GitHub Octoverse Reports: Trends in Open-Source Repositories
- Tiobe Index: Language Popularity Rankings
- Linux Foundation: Open-Source Project Statistics
- Chromium Project: Public Repository for Chrome's Source Code
- Barr Group Embedded Systems Survey: Insights into Embedded Systems Programming
- DARPA Reports: U.S. Government Software Systems
- ACM and IEEE Papers: Multiple research papers on software growth and codebase sizes
- The Coded Message
- OpenSSF Memory-Safe Programming Languages
- Y2K and the Year 2038 Problem
- Stanford APARC: Y2K Impact Today
_____________________________________
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Brad LaPorte is a cybersecurity industry expert and a former top-rated Gartner Research cybersecurity analyst. He was the lead analyst for Threat Intelligence at Gartner and was credited with creating five market categories during his tenure there, including Digital Risk Protection and Attack Surface Management. He has held senior positions in US Cyber Intelligence, Dell, and IBM, as well as in several startups. Brad has spent most of his career on the frontlines fighting cybercriminals and advising C-level executives and thought leaders on how to be as efficient and effective as possible. He is an advisor with Lionfish Tech Advisors, helping cybersecurity and tech companies grow their go-to-market strategies.
ABOUT LIONFISH TECH ADVISORS
Lionfish Tech Advisors offers advice to help businesses with their digital enterprise and IT initiatives. They work with enterprise and finance leaders, CIOs, CxOs, and technology organizations to give practical and strategic advice that can help modernize and transform their businesses.
Their advice is aimed at helping businesses understand and meet the changing demands of their customers. Lionfish Tech Advisors uses proven methodologies and industry best practices to help businesses overcome complex challenges and make decisive actions with confidence. Their analysts have decades of extensive experience working with a range of global and industry-leading clients.
Lionfish Tech Advisors takes an unbiased approach and connects with subscribers on a deep level.
Lionfish Tech Advisors Report: “Modernizing Legacy Software: A Cost Analysis 30-100x Greater Than Y2K” is for decision makers and policy managers considering reevaluating their cybersecurity posture and approach to more secure coding practices. This report is based on our analysis and expert opinion.
_____________________________________
©2024 Lionfish Tech Advisors, Inc. All rights reserved.
“Modernizing Legacy Software: A Cost Analysis 30-100x Greater Than Y2K”.
For permission to reproduce this report, please contact info@lionfishtechadvisors.com
To download the full report, click on this link
Punch cards image source
IBM 5081 Punch Card Used with Punch Card Gauge, National Museum of American History, CC0.