Security

4953 readers

7 users here now

Confidentiality Integrity Availability

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml

The right thing for the wrong reasons: FLOSS doesn't imply security (seirdy.one)

submitted 2 years ago by Seirdy@lemmy.ml to c/security@lemmy.ml

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I find people who agree with me for the wrong reasons to be more problematic than people who simply disagree with me. After writing a lot about why free software is important, I needed to clarify that there are good and bad reasons for supporting it.

You can audit the security of proprietary software quite thoroughly; source code isn't a necessary or sufficient precondition for a particular software implementation to be considered secure.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Seirdy@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

The article focused on studying the behavior and properties of software. For completeness, it mentioned how patching can be crowdsourced with the example of Calibre. I also described how FLOSS decreases dependence on a vendor, and wrote two prior posts about this linked at the top.

I never claimed that source code is useless, only that we shouldn't assume the worst if it isn't provided.