It doesn't zero on free, that's not what the code does. But if you're looking for something to prevent exploits, then no, this is not it, nor does it try to be.
> But if you're looking for something to prevent exploits, then no, this is not it, nor does it try to be.
> How would you want that implemented?
Any of the usual existing ways of managing memory lifetimes (i.e. garbage collection or Rust-style borrow checking) prevents that particular kind of exploitation (subject to various caveats) by ensuring you can't have a pointer to memory that has already been freed. So one would expect something that claims to solve the same problem to solve that problem.
How would you want that implemented?