Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: OSS means slower patches


From: bkfsec <bkfsec () sdf lonestar org>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 09:56:32 -0400

Roman Drahtmueller wrote:


Security vulnerabilities are usually dealt with "best effort" commitment
on behalf of the vendors. It's going to be your decision as to which
model you trust more: Simply relying on your vendor's commercial
commitment, or, in addition to that, benefit from an OSS developer's
personal motivation to keep and improve his reputation. Keep in mind that with closed source, you can't really tell what has been changed in a fix and that the fix actually addresses the problem.

Not to mention that something that actually is a function of the Free Software/Open Source Software ideologies is a degree of transparency.

If you're measuring "time to disclosure" versus "time to patch" you most definitely should expect a difference because people are more likely to just disclose vulnerabilities in FS/OSS applications whereas people finding flaws in proprietary software tend to keep those flaws to their chest for a longer period of time than others - both for legal reasons and due to vendor requirements.

In other words, the difference in the development methods inherently makes the method of statistical analysis used invalid.

GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out... that mantra doesn't just work for computers, it works for statistics as well.

            -Barry


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


Current thread: