, SecurityFocus 2001-04-12
Redmond's security response chief warns the RSA Conference of the perils of open source.
Expand all |
Post comment
Security under MS products VS. Linux, *BSD
2001-04-12
giard.pascal (at) teccart.qc (dot) ca [email concealed]
giard.pascal (at) teccart.qc (dot) ca [email concealed]
Closed source more secure? Really?
2001-04-13
counter_counterinsurgency (at) nospam.hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
counter_counterinsurgency (at) nospam.hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
Is Microsoft code more secure than open alternatives?
2001-04-13
Larry Fahnoe <fahnoe (at) FahnoeTech (dot) com [email concealed]>
Larry Fahnoe <fahnoe (at) FahnoeTech (dot) com [email concealed]>
Microsoft: Closed source is more secure FSVO secure
2001-04-13
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <shmuel (at) acm (dot) org [email concealed]> (2 replies)
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <shmuel (at) acm (dot) org [email concealed]> (2 replies)
Closed source burdened by "boring, expensive" QA
2001-04-16
counter_counterinsurgency (at) nospam.hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
counter_counterinsurgency (at) nospam.hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
Microsoft: Closed source is more secure FSVO secure
2001-04-17
bassethound2 (at) yahoo (dot) com [email concealed]
bassethound2 (at) yahoo (dot) com [email concealed]
Open vs. closed not necessarily it....
2001-04-16
abostaph (at) usa (dot) net [email concealed] (1 replies)
abostaph (at) usa (dot) net [email concealed] (1 replies)
Open vs. closed not necessarily it....
2001-04-16
Microsoft Defender (2 replies)
Microsoft Defender (2 replies)
Open vs. closed not necessarily it....
2001-04-18
abostaph (at) usa (dot) net [email concealed] (1 replies)
abostaph (at) usa (dot) net [email concealed] (1 replies)
Security Vulnerability Open Source vs Closed Source
2001-04-17
Rod <snaketails (at) optushome.com (dot) au [email concealed]>
Rod <snaketails (at) optushome.com (dot) au [email concealed]>
who gets cracked more?
2001-04-18
TauRine (1 replies)
TauRine (1 replies)
the sources to find them.
But apparently companies that distribute closed source software think
they don't have to obey elemetary rules for computer security.
Or they think they don't need to fix such bugs.
Until somebody finds them and abuses them...
Perhaps this is the reason for the numerous DOS attacks against
such software. It is quite easy to produce a buffer overflow in a closed source program programmed in a bad style. While it might be more difficult to exploit it on closed source system to get root privileges it is easily possible to shut down such a site by such a trick as a DOS attack.
So closed source systems are not superior to open source systems.
On the other hand operating systems like Windows or VMS are not
really closed source. Institutes can get the sources for research purposes. A student could steal the sources and abuse this knowledge while all other
users might think the system is safe.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/191/5348#5348