SQL injection is a problem with incompetent developpers. Most languages have simple constructs to make them immune to injections, like parameterized queries.

If you are exposing code to an untrusted, hostile environment (which is pretty much the web), no language that does anything useful will protect you against not caring about security.

Like LINQ

Exactly.

The solution suggested is not-html, a specific thing for web apps, where data is separate.

Bobby tables would be considered data. Or should be. And hopefully it would be obvious that it doesn't belong in the code section.

But like you I'm not totally convinced. I think this idea would make it easier for people trying to do the right thing to get it right; but for the blissfully ignorant? Might not help at all. Either way it needs a more flushed out spec.

This absolutely fixes Bobby DROP TABLE. The source of truth on how long the user's name is is just the length of the user-supplied slug.

From the XKCD:

   Robert'); DROP TABLE Students; --

The issue here is that

    '); 

Is being intepreted as the end of a string; it assumes that there will be something like:

    format("SOME_FN('%s');",user_name)

going into SQL, and this fools the system.

SQL solves this already with parameterized queries, and many HTML libraries also solve this in various ways, but if it were instead:

    format("SOME_FN(%d:%s)", len(user_name), user_name)

then there is no value you can put in user_name that will let you escape the function call.

Length prefixes are one way of working this, but only scratch the surface of the issue. As others have pointed out, it's also the fact that the control elements are inline with the data.

    <p:25><script:14>somethingBad()

Will still run somethingBad(). You are at least sandboxed to the containing element though, so restricting certain elements to only appear in parts of the HTML tree could prevent this (e.g. if all scripts were disallowed in BODY then merely constraining user-generated content to the BODY would work; right now you could still get hit by someone including </body> in their content.

Droll. But wasn't context unawareness part of the problem too?