Is the Project Zero team just too lazy to remind Chromium to use sanitizers?
(Also Rust defenders please note I'm not saying Rust can't work at that scale. I'm just saying, it's a very big scale and I think it's an open problem. My personal opinion and gut say yes, it shouldn't be any worse than it has to be because of the sheer size (that is, the essential complexity is pretty significant no matter what you do), but I don't know that.)
There would absolutely be issues, including security issues. But there is also very good evidence that the issues that are most exploited in browsers and operating systems relate to memory safety. Alex Gaynor's piece that the author linked is good on this point.
While securing Chromium is huge and a difficult task, it and consumer operating systems are crucial for individual security. Until browsers and consumer operating systems are secure, individuals ranging from persecuted political dissidents to Jeff Bezos won't be secure.
* Actually not sure why I said Chromium rather than Chrome. Nothing hangs on the distinction, afaict.
I don't think this does much for your initial claim. Take the most generous reading you can--Rust isn't any better at preventing UAF than C/C++. That doesn't make safe C/C++ a thing, it means that Rust isn't an appropriate solution.
Writing unsafe code and removing tools "because production" gets you unsafe code as shown in that rust cve
Lazy C++ is unsafe, lazy Zig is safe-ish, lazy Rust is safe. Given how lazy most programmers are, I consider that a strong argument against C++.
Maybe I'm missing something here?