Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.

What's Worse, Open-Source Vulnerabilities, or Poor Enterprise IT Security?

posted by janrinok on Thursday May 17 2018, @08:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the it-wasn't-me dept.

requerdanos writes:

There's a minor media dust-up over which is worse, Open-source vulnerabilities, or Poor Enterprise IT Security?

On Tuesday, 15 May, ZDNet quoted from a Black Duck study and opined that the problem was the "Open-source vulnerabilities", posting an article entitled Open-source vulnerabilities plague enterprise codebase systems.

Vulnerabilities including the bug reportedly responsible for Equifax's data breach are still common elements of open-source systems used in the enterprise... the nature of open-source projects means that as developers are giving away their time for free, sometimes, bugs may escape the net and cause chaos...

Wednesday, May 16th, TechRepublic answered with Enterprise IT shouldn't blame open source for their own poor security practices:

Even if we set aside the fact that Black Duck sells tools and services to root open source out of your enterprise... Open source vulnerabilities will often get disclosed earlier than those in managed software [and] its up to IT to apply the patches.

In other words, open source developers are doing their best to write good software, publish notices when bugs are found, and then fix those bugs. What the open source world cannot do, however, is fix inept IT practices. Despite the headlines, it's not the open source world's problem that so many want to use the software but can't be bothered to apply updates.

Is the problem more one, or the other, or both? Or is it the insistence on calling free software "Open Source," referring to just one freedom of many?

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
What's Worse, Open-Source Vulnerabilities, or Poor Enterprise IT Security? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 23 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2018, @09:03AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2018, @09:03AM (#681087)

    Hmmm. You have be digging through my archives.

    Dr. Roy (years before he got his PhD in Computer Science) had a page he called the The Free Software Credibility Index on his site which was then called BoycottNovell.
    My bookmark was so ancient that when I created it, hyphens still worked with wildcards 100 percent in Google cache URLs.

    Re-did those 2 things but I'm not getting the URL of the cached page to resolve for me.
    Maybe it's just a crap server near me that hasn't updated and you'll have better luck.[1]
    cache [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [techrights.org]

    Again: Only an example of what is needed; horribly out of date.
    (I see dead people['s names].)

    [1] Used to be able to put 1 of Google's several numerical domains in the URL to bypass that sort of crap. No mas.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]