|
|
|
|
|
by wglb
4229 days ago
|
|
It's kind of bizarre to me that people finding bugs in open source software and being able to both patch it and release patches of it themselves indicates a failure of open source. The claim is not that it is a failure of open source, but that is a failure in the "many eyeballs" claim. Looking at two fairly famous bug hunters, Juliano Rizzo and Thai Duong finding POET, BEAST and CRIME, didn't require open source to find these bugs. BEAST was identified in 2002, but wasn't taken seriously. Not having source is not much of a speed bump for a bug finder. This "many eyeballs" is giving us all a false sense of security. |
|
Precisely!
This issue is further amplified by the fact that lots of people believe that "open source" means "trustworthy". If someone opens up their code, they must be good guys. This assumption is very easy to exploit. All a bad player needs to do is to distribute both the source and the binaries, but build latter from an alternative source. Just look how long it took for someone to actually try and verify that TrueCrypt binaries were in fact built from the source supplied. And that's for a security product with a massive installation base.