Re: A Question of Quality

["Daniël W. Crompton" <daniel.crompton () gmail com>]

2008/11/2 Robert Hajime Lanning <robert.lanning () gmail com>:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Yousef Syed <yousef.syed () gmail com> wrote:
> > Why isn't Quality Assumed?
> > Why isn't Security Assumed?
> > Why are these concepts thought of as add ons to Applications and Services?
> >
> > Why do they need to be specified, when they should be taken for granted?

> I believe one of the issues is, pride of ownership in the end product.
>
> A lot of the coding is now outsourced to cheap code houses.  These people
> do not have ownership or attribution.  They have no reason to take any extra
> steps, that are not specified in the contract.  If it is not in the
> contract, they
> are not being paid for it.

I have to disagree with you there, even if you examine code that comes
from internally where they have pride of ownership there are many
security considerations which are only later applied to the product.
Many times it's the case that security aspects are tacked on later,
rather than being considered from the outset.

D.

blaze your trail

--
redhat

http://feeds.feedburner.com/GeneralMusing