Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
Open Source v. Closed Source: What's More Secure?
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
10/21/2014 | 11:07:40 AM
Re: Devil's Advocate
Agreed, sometimes when something is implemented that cannot increase security posture you need to go back to the framework and make changes to the baseline. This may be off topic from Open Source vs Closed Source, but DoS is the same way. Its still very prevalent due to the way hardware handles packets. A needed functionality, so changes need to be made to the overall hardware handling. However, I do think that more hands involved in the rearchitecture would be optimal. 
Lucamp
Lucamp,
User Rank: Strategist
10/21/2014 | 5:29:54 AM
Open source
From my persective, open source is more secure and more people work on it that in close code. However, the types of vulnerabilites that open source is exposed is different that in close code. Also the quality of open source projeects is higher that in close code from my experience (Two Big Companies). 
Dr.T
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/20/2014 | 1:46:59 PM
Re: Devil's Advocate
Good point. That also depends of the architecture of the system, you can not make Java any more secure regardless of how many developers you put on it. A new way of thinking and architecture is needed for that.
Dr.T
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/20/2014 | 1:44:47 PM
Agree with the video
 

I think video is taking right approach tough, no need to differentiate open source from closed source when it comes to security, both will have vulnerabilities and they requires us to do ongoing monitoring and analysis to catch those vulnerabilities before they heard us.
Dr.T
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/20/2014 | 1:42:17 PM
Open source
Open source may reveal more information in its structure but at the same time it may also be an environment that vulnerabilities are found and mitigated early enough since more than one set of eyes are looking at it.
RyanSepe
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
10/20/2014 | 11:16:26 AM
Devil's Advocate
I agree very much with this ideology of closed versus open source. But to be the devil's advocate, wouldn't the same reason provided "more people being able to see the source code" also provide for a more adept security model. In theory, the more eyes that look at the code the greater the exposure to expanding on that code beneficially. This includes not only security but app development. Linux and Linux derivatives are very much based on this methodology. What reasoning then is it assumed that more exposure to the code will result in a detrimental outcome over a beneficial one?


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Black Hat USA 2022 Attendee Report
Black Hat attendees are not sleeping well. Between concerns about attacks against cloud services, ransomware, and the growing risks to the global supply chain, these security pros have a lot to be worried about. Read our 2022 report to hear what they're concerned about now.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-35942
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-12
Improper input validation on the `contains` LoopBack filter may allow for arbitrary SQL injection. When the extended filter property `contains` is permitted to be interpreted by the Postgres connector, it is possible to inject arbitrary SQL which may affect the confidentiality and integrity of data ...
CVE-2022-35949
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-12
undici is an HTTP/1.1 client, written from scratch for Node.js.`undici` is vulnerable to SSRF (Server-side Request Forgery) when an application takes in **user input** into the `path/pathname` option of `undici.request`. If a user specifies a URL such as `http://127.0.0.1` or `//127.0.0.1` ```js con...
CVE-2022-35953
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-12
BookWyrm is a social network for tracking your reading, talking about books, writing reviews, and discovering what to read next. Some links in BookWyrm may be vulnerable to tabnabbing, a form of phishing that gives attackers an opportunity to redirect a user to a malicious site. The issue was patche...
CVE-2022-35956
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-12
This Rails gem adds two methods to the ActiveRecord::Base class that allow you to update many records on a single database hit, using a case sql statement for it. Before version 0.1.3 `update_by_case` gem used custom sql strings, and it was not sanitized, making it vulnerable to sql injection. Upgra...
CVE-2022-35943
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-12
Shield is an authentication and authorization framework for CodeIgniter 4. This vulnerability may allow [SameSite Attackers](https://canitakeyoursubdomain.name/) to bypass the [CodeIgniter4 CSRF protection](https://codeigniter4.github.io/userguide/libraries/security.html) mechanism with CodeIgniter ...