I think JS (well, ES6) has a ton of positive qualities, and I think it's a great fit for many of its current applications. However, this is a pretty good example of what bothers me about the way many people use it. I see a lot of folks, in the name of pragmatism, adopt a ton of existing libraries and services so they don't have to think about more complex parts of the problem they're solving. Great! No need to reinvent the wheel. But, people also seem to falsely equate popularity with stability-- if there's a ton of people using it, SURELY someone has vetted it, and is keeping a close eye on it, no? Well, maybe no? It just seems that the bar for what people consider 'infrastructure' is simply too low. While I don't think that, alone, is SO different from other popular interpreted languages, the light weight of JS environments means you need to incorporate a LOT of that stuff to get functionality that might otherwise be part of a standard library or ubiquitous stalwart framework, which dramatically increases the exposure to events like this.

I think a lot of people conflate criticism of JS with criticism of the way it's been used for the past number of years, putting a nuanced topic into a black-and-white "for or against" sort of discussion. I've done a number of projects heavily using JS-- vanilla, with modern frameworks, server-side and in the browser-- and aside from some fundamental annoyances with it's approach to a few things, it's been a great tool. There's nothing fundamental about JS itself that makes applications vulnerable to this like a buffer overflow would, but the way it is used right now seems to make it a lot easier for inexperienced, under-resourced, or even just distracted developers to open up big holes using generally accepted techniques.

But I've never been a full-time front-end-web or node dev, so maybe I'm mistaken? Compared to the server-side stuff I've worked with, there's definitely a concerning wild west vibe moving into modern JS environments. I think there was a casual "well, it's all in client-side userspace" attitude about the way it was used before which effectively shifted most of the security concerns to the browser. We should probably push a little harder to shake that. Think about how much JS your bank uses in their website? I'll bet they didn't write all of their own interaction libraries.