Generally speaking, holes in open-source projects are found by contributors much faster than by malicious attackers. If Flash really was a security concern, and

Generally speaking, holes in open-source projects are found by contributors much faster than by malicious attackers. If Flash really was a security concern, and I don't believe it is, I would personally rather have it open-sourced than closed source. The very intelligent hackers that would find the holes faster than open source contributors, are probably capable of finding the holes regardless of their possession of the source code (or lack thereof). That, however, is an entirely separate issue. Second, can you post some more specific details about concerns you have about Flash? I really don't see how your concern is any different than the standard concern about any open-source project. A lot of that comes down to opinion, and has already been overly debated. I've look at a lot of Adobe's open-source stuff, and I'm of the opinion that almost all of Flash is already open-source, and that it presents very little security risk. Both products I posted have a very healthy following of people looking over the code and reporting issues. Other than your opinion, what are you basing this question on? edit: Perhaps it's clearer to ask the question: What's different between Adobe finding bugs in their closed-source code and Microsoft finding bugs in their closed-source code? And yet Linux finds itself with much fewer attacks in the wild - because the people who know Linux best are the ones maintaining the code!