Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gwbas1c 2527 days ago
Could just be because the application was written by a less experienced programmer, or even outsourced?
4 comments

It could be, or it could even be that whatever process that brings code from development to production is less stringent on internal applications. Maybe people don't review the code as closely (or at all!), maybe they have fewer tests for internal code. "Internal only" applications almost universally have less scrutiny applied to them in my experience.
I've seen very experienced developers make mistakes with input/output sanitation.
I work as a contractor for a bank and while investigating a small security issue reported by a third-party audit firm, we discovered that the clever, bytecode-weaving-autogenerated-declarative security had been overriden by someone who added his own, equaly fancy security module directly in a parent project.

I cannot describe the shock when I realized what information an attacker could have gained in a window of 6 months the bug was active.

All of this code was written by experienced programmers, it's just that nobody ever wrote any tests to ensure the fancy security code was still in place.

Tesla and SpaceX are both pretty maniacal about not outsourcing programming, to my knowledge.
Interesting. Obviously they view it as a core competency. This would seem like a non-obvious and unnecessary expense to many, but (on the Tesla side) differentiates them from other automakers. Whether that results in a barrier to competition... we'll see.
Although if you believe these anecdotes from a supposed ex-employee then competency is not the word to use:

https://twitter.com/atomicthumbs/status/1032939617404645376

I only know of low-level tools being open sourced like service meshes, RPC clients, event busses, and metric servers. I’ve never seen internal applications open sourced. Do you have an example?
OP said out sourced, not open sourced