[baobun]

For security-critical or sensitive situations, auditability should be a requirement. That implies access to source code and capabilty to build it.

Decisions like these need to be done from first principles. SharePoint shouldn't even have been a contender here if looked at seriously. Do your own homework.

[Havoc]

Think you answered just about everything except the question asked

[rcbdev]

I think this guy wants OpenBSD running on a POWER-based Mainframe at every governmental organization.

[saltcured]

Well, if you can't manage text emails with BSD mailx from the CLI, you probably shouldn't be working on nuclear weapons in the first place...

[mmooss]

> For security-critical or sensitive situations, auditability should be a requirement. That implies access to source code and capabilty to build it.

Vendors can be accountable without providing source code, for example through contracts specifying performance.

I don't know how large Sharepoint's source is, though it has many components and I assume there is quite a bit of code. Auditing the source code of something like Microsoft Office seems almost impossible.

> first principles.

What does that mean in this context?

[LoganDark]

Doesn't Microsoft have government programs that grant source code access for products like Windows and (probably) SharePoint?