Open source doesn't make software safer

Filed under
OSS

There is this ludicrous paradigm among the technorati that just because a piece of software is developed collaboratively and by enthusiasts with source code shared freely on the web, that automatically makes it more secure and less buggy.

"When everyone can look at your code," runs the argument, "flaws get found more quickly and patches get released almost immediately."

But although everyone can look at open source code, in practice, the only people who do are those involved in developing the software and those trying to create malware that exploits it.

This is exactly the same situation that applies to closed source software, except that it is somewhat harder for the hackers to get their copy of the code.

More here




Another non article

Where this article fails bigtime is it's disregard for reality.

Windows = millions of malware and viruses
Linux = virtually none, and those holes are quickly patched.

So practical reality show his argument is rubbish. Also the assertion that malware attacks Microsoft because it is an attack on "the man" is also spurious. Most modern virus and malware writers are criminals and in it for the money, they do not care who or what company they target, only results.

It is also handy that Linux is inherently more secure by design and sensible Linux people get their software from a repository, not some dodgy warez site or bittorrent.

GregE
Melbourne, Australia

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.