Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Writing Secure Code... |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:33:26 -0800 |
You can't fix it if you bought it closed source.
I see, you are talking about _purchased_ software. Well sure, that's
an advantage... but really, how many people make use of it ? And maybe it's appropriate for some people, but (obviously) the typical end-user couldn't care at all about that aspect. (i.e. the typical user corporations aim for...) I in general do not want to pay the price of learning someone else's code to that extent. My time is worth something, so if someone else's software does not work the way I'd like, I generally either ask them to fix it, use someone else's software, or if it is something I know a little about, write my own. Only if I were really interested in the project would I get involved enough to think about submitting fixes (and obviously I personally would have to be working elsewhere). Companies usually don't have the bandwidth, particularly with respect to operational people, to keep real programmers on staff and give them time to go fix things.
I wholeheartedly agree. Business decisions + software = shoddy implementation. OSS removes the business decisions and leaves the programmers to thrive in excellence.
But you say "OSS" projects are "funded" by corporate customers. This -
money - introduces "business" decisions... (i.e how to spend the money, and how to get more of it). Right - which goes back to my original premise that security is a very weak function of business model and who you let read your source. It is a strong function of the processes, practices and education level of the people creating the software. Another point would be is that at the end of the day, nearly everything is a result of a sort of business decision. A very interesting book which has the premise that most of our decisions can actually be modelled using economics is "Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life". I think we should try and get back on topic - leave the OSS vs. proprietary debate for elsewhere. I don't think it is really important to security. What's a lot more interesting to me is how to effectively create processes, practices, and information that leads to more secure software, whereever you happen to be writing it.
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: J2EE Security Training, Levenglick, Jeff |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: secure storage of sensitive data in J2EE, Steve Taylor |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Writing Secure Code..., Michael Silk |
| Next by Thread: | Authorization Framework., Babu Kopparam |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |