3 ms·
The cost of these security flaws is likely to become more expensive than the cost of replacing the existing software. Expensive to whom? When was Microsoft or
by jodrellblank 8y ago
The cost of these security flaws is likely to become more expensive than the cost of replacing the existing software.
Expensive to whom? When was Microsoft or RedHat or Oracle or the FreeBSD foundation last fined or sued because of a security flaw - an unmanaged memory one, specifically?
When was a random company or developer fined or sued for same?
- asdff 8y agoShutting down servers or stealing credit card info certainly has a cost
- max76 8y agoThe bandwidth costs for Globalsign incurred for revoking SSL certificates in response to Heartbleed was estimated to $400K in a Cloudflare blob post [0] and eWeek estimated the total cost of Heartbleed to be $500M [1], although admittedly this price tag is an educated guess. You're question is expensive to whom. The answer is the expenses are spread across the entire industry. Every time a software author needs to write a patch the bigger cumulative expense is to all of their customers that need to apply the patch. [0] https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-hard-costs-of-heartbleed/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-hard-costs-of-heartbleed/ [1] https://www.eweek.com/security/heartbleed-ssl-flaw-s-true-cost-will-take-time-to-tally https://www.eweek.com/security/heartbleed-ssl-flaw-s-true-co...