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.

Application Security

Open Source v. Closed Source: What's More Secure?

0%
100%

In the wake of Shellshock and Heartbleed, has the glow of open-source application security dimmed?

Comment  | 
Print  | 
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
50%
50%
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
50%
50%
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
50%
50%
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
50%
50%
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
50%
50%
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
50%
50%
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?
I 'Hacked' My Accounts Using My Mobile Number: Here's What I Learned
Nicole Sette, Director in the Cyber Risk practice of Kroll, a division of Duff & Phelps,  11/19/2019
DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Attackers' Costs Increasing as Businesses Focus on Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/15/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-3311
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
Directory traversal vulnerability in the Loftek Nexus 543 IP Camera allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the URL of an HTTP GET request.
CVE-2013-3312
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the Loftek Nexus 543 IP Camera allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of unspecified victims for requests that change (1) passwords or (2) firewall configuration, as demonstrated by a request to set_users.cgi.
CVE-2013-3313
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
The Loftek Nexus 543 IP Camera stores passwords in cleartext, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via an HTTP GET request to check_users.cgi. NOTE: cleartext passwords can also be obtained from proc/kcore when leveraging the directory traversal vulnerability in CVE-2013-331...
CVE-2013-3314
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
The Loftek Nexus 543 IP Camera allows remote attackers to obtain (1) IP addresses via a request to get_realip.cgi or (2) firmware versions (ui and system), timestamp, serial number, p2p port number, and wifi status via a request to get_status.cgi.
CVE-2015-2793
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in templates/openid-selector.tmpl in ikiwiki before 3.20150329 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the openid_identifier parameter in a verify action to ikiwiki.cgi.