Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Open Source vs. Windows: Security Debate Rages On

Filed under
Microsoft
OSS

It's a topic of fierce debate among high-tech cognoscenti: What's more secure -- "open source" code such as Linux and Apache, or proprietary "closed source" operating systems and applications, Microsoft's in particular?

The regularity with which Microsoft has taken to announcing vulnerabilities and consequent software fixes has left few cheering about its security. In contrast, high expectations endure for open source, with proponents arguing that it's inherently more secure because a much larger set of developers can read the code, vet it and correct problems.

"I'm struggling to think of anyone who would argue the other way," says Adam Jollans, chief Linux technologist at IBM Latest News about IBMSoftware Group.

"Discovery is different in the open source and closed source approach," Jollans says. "Because source code is visible to lots of people, if there is a security issue, it tends to be spotted earlier. The open source community isn't shy about criticizing bad code."

Thus, open source developers are "more able to respond quickly and to use new and more secure techniques. Because they perform for peers' kudos, this, too, behooves them to perform well," Clarke says.

"Open source development is centered around operating systems designed many years ago with security and Internet connectivity as a base requirement," he adds.

Open source is foremost an "ethos" that "is precisely the best social environment for the best development of anything," Clarke maintains. "By contrast, the principle culprit of poor security, Microsoft, has several major issues with producing secure code."

Microsoft seems lax to security threats," says Robert Swiercz, managing director of the Portal of Montreal, the city's Web site. "I have less and less ability to trust them." He, too, expresses confidence in the open source community, saying, "This is where the solutions are coming from."

However, some call these assumptions into question and assert there's a lack of accountability in fixing open source. A number of research firms are ready to puncture the belief that open source is by its very nature superior.

Other I.T. managers say they like a lot of open source security tools and applications but corporate policies prevent them from using them.

"We don't do open source because my lawyer says there's no one to sue," says Phil Maier, vice president of information security at Inovant, Visa's technology deployment division. "The lawyers had the final say."

Full Article.

More in Tux Machines

Today in Techrights

FreeBSD-Based TrueOS Operating System Gets New Jail Tools, Automounting Feature

The developers of the FreeBSD-based TrueOS operating system (formerly PC-BSD) announced the release and general availability of a new stable build versioned 2017-02-22. Read more

Calamares 3.1 Distribution-Independent Linux Installer Officially Released

The Calamares open-source universal installer framework for Linux-based operating systems has been updated recently to version 3.1, a major release the users of the KaOS GNU/Linux distribution can already enjoy if they download the latest ISO snapshot. Read more

Reiser4 Updated For The Linux 4.10 Kernel

The out-of-tree Reiser4 file-system has been updated for the Linux 4.10 kernel. Reiser4 for the Linux 4.10.0 kernel is available as of earlier this week, managing to release their updated file-system driver code quite promptly. This port to Linux 4.10 yielded a few changes to the Reiser4 code as they re-based to this Linux kernel with the ->readlink() of inode operations being removed as well as the WRITE_FLUSH_FUA flag being removed. Read more