Nothing is broken. The Internet is secure. As evidence of the fact that the Internet is secure I point to the fact that you use it everyday for pretty much everything, and yet your problems are minor. You are more at risk from traffic accidents than the Internet.
Are things optimal? Maybe. Maybe not. There are certainly problems that we would like not to exist. But that doesn't mean things are "broken" or even "suboptimal", as the cure might be worse than the disease.
That things are "broken" is an argument that jack booted thugs use to argue why you need to have unwanted security imposed upon you against your will. That it's "Internet security" is no different than any other military or police state security.
Note that the people telling you "everything is broken" aren't the ones building things, the coders writing the code. Instead, it's populists who pretend that writing good secure code is easy, that it's due to moral weakness (greed, laziness, etc.) that is the cause of brokeness.
"If only we didn't program in C". Sure, C is a "memory unsafe" language, and certain classes of bugs result from this that wouldn't happen if rewrote everything in Rust and Go.
But here's the thing. It's only a small percentage of the bugs, which can be mitigated through other techniques. The code in question contains decades of subtle information that prevent rewrites from working.
Go and Rust are awesomely cool languages. However, they aren't the solution to C's memory-safety problems. What's needed is a memory-safe version of C that allows refactoring existing code -- a thing that doesn't really exist yet.
