|
|
|
|
|
by janwh
2878 days ago
|
|
> (...) very hard for small projects, like the team running Homebrew, to fund their security, yet they are likely to be a target for quite high end attackers, (...) I disagree. Homebrew’s security considerations in this case have nothing to do with their funding. There are lot of terrific services available for next to nothing for open source projects, Jenkins is one of them. It must have been a conscious decision the way HB set up their CI, unaffected by funding. And such lapses are not an open door jyst to “high end attackers”. This was a single person with just internet access and a little knowledge about how modern OSS projects work. |
|
The cost of good security is high - audits, slowed down development, limited data retention, higher compute costs... and the return on that investment is only ever going to be a reduction of liability.
Big company with lots of resources, small company with no resources; it doesn't matter. Security is a cost center, and will only ever get a token amount of resources until the costs of doing nothing outweigh the costs of doing something.