Livsy Code

Is Apple Using Rust Inside iOS? A Look at the Rumors

Greetings, traveler!

Recently, conversations have emerged in the developer community suggesting that Apple might be introducing Rust into the internals of iOS. Some even claim that core system components are being rewritten in Rust, shifting away from Objective-C or Swift. Given Rust’s reputation for memory safety and reliability in systems programming, these rumors are not surprising. But how much of this can be verified? Let’s break it down.

Where the Rumors Come From

The discussion largely stems from Apple’s job postings. Over the past few years, some positions have explicitly mentioned Rust as a desirable skill, and in certain cases even referenced migrating components from C to Rust. Against the backdrop of a wider industry trend toward memory-safe languages, this has led to rumors that Apple could be adopting Rust more broadly within its platforms.

What Can Be Confirmed

Focus on Memory Safety

Apple has publicly emphasized its long-term commitment to memory safety. In several posts on the Apple Security Research blog, the company described measures such as:

  • The introduction of kalloc_type, a type-aware allocator in the XNU kernel.
  • New allocation mechanisms to mitigate memory corruption vulnerabilities.
  • Targeted rewrites of specific components in Swift, where feasible.

These efforts are aimed at reducing security flaws tied to unsafe C code.

Rust in Apple Job Postings

Apple has published roles that list Rust among relevant programming languages, but most of these openings are not tied directly to iOS frameworks. Instead, they tend to appear in teams working on distributed systems, data platforms, storage, networking, and cloud services. In some cases, postings have explicitly mentioned experience migrating code from C to Rust.

Rust and Apple Platforms in Practice

The broader developer community has already proven Rust can interoperate with Apple platforms via FFI. Projects such as Rust bindings for WebKit and AppKit show that integrating Rust into macOS and iOS ecosystems is technically feasible, even if not officially endorsed by Apple.

Why Rust?

Swift is a great type-safe language with clean syntax and optional handling — a stark contrast to the verbose and error-prone style of Objective-C.

But at its core, much of iOS and macOS still relies on decades of C and Objective-C foundations. Modern Apple frameworks under the hood still leans on frameworks written in C.

Apple’s strategy seems pragmatic. Swift remains an excellent choice for applications and higher-level frameworks, but for the lowest levels of the operating system it may be more convenient to work with something different. For critical code such as kernel patches, drivers, or cryptographic routines, stronger guarantees are often required. This is where Rust can become a suitable choice.

Apple is not alone in exploring memory-safe languages at the systems level. Across Big Tech, Rust adoption has become a clear trend:

Rust provides a path forward with stronger compile-time guarantees, making it attractive for companies operating at massive scale.

What Remains Unconfirmed

At this stage, there is no public evidence that iOS kernel components or major frameworks are being rewritten in Rust.

In its 2025 post on Memory Integrity Enforcement, Apple once again highlighted Swift alongside system-level protections, but made no mention of Rust.

Rust and iOS Development Today

It’s also important to separate Apple’s internal use of Rust from what independent developers can do on iOS. Rust is already being used in the iOS ecosystem, but with limitations:

  • Bindings and FFI: Developers can bridge Rust with Swift or Objective-C by exposing C interfaces and linking them into Xcode projects. This makes it possible to write performance-critical code in Rust and call it from Swift. However, interoperability is still experimental and requires boilerplate.
  • Rust-native builds: There are examples of games and apps written in Rust and compiled directly to run on iOS without using Xcode as the main toolchain. Frameworks like Tauri 2.0 also provide cross-platform options where Rust powers the backend logic, and Swift or JavaScript handle the user interface.
  • Limitations in Xcode: Apple’s official toolchain provides little direct support for Rust. For most production apps, developers still rely on C FFI as the bridge, and a fully “Rust-only” iOS application is not yet practical.

In short, Rust can be integrated into iOS apps today, and some teams are already doing so for specialized use cases. But this should not be confused with Apple itself rewriting iOS in Rust. For now, the language is best seen as a complementary tool for developers — particularly where safety and performance are critical.

Community Discussions

The topic of “Apple rewriting iOS in Rust” occasionally resurfaces on forums and social platforms like X (formerly Twitter). However, much of the conversation points back to the article published on Medium.

So far, there have been no credible leaks or insider confirmations supporting claims of a large-scale migration inside iOS. What does circulate are individual experiences — for example, iOS developers experimenting with Rust for side projects — or lighthearted debates comparing Rust to C++ in the context of systems programming.

In other words, while the community clearly finds the Rust-Apple connection intriguing, the current discussion does not seem to be based on new technical discoveries.

Conclusion

The available facts suggest two parallel developments:

  • Apple is strengthening memory safety in iOS through systemic improvements.
  • Rust is in use at Apple, at least within certain teams, as reflected in job postings.

However, there is no strong confirmation that iOS itself is being rewritten in Rust.

It might be interesting: