3 ms·
> Actually, it's worse than that, because unlike normal banks, the code used by these digital banks is open source, and anyone in the world can go bug hunting.
by bko 5y ago
> Actually, it's worse than that, because unlike normal banks, the code used by these digital banks is open source, and anyone in the world can go bug hunting.
An argument that open source is less secure, and on Hacker News! Now I've seen it all.
- gpderetta 5y agoIt is not a statement about security but about plausible deniability.
- TravisHusky 5y agoThere is an argument to be made for having some things remain closed, and obscured from public view. If a company/group has an experienced and large internal audit team that reviews systems, and they are building something that is likely to be placed under extreme amounts of targeted attacks (military crypto, banking systems, etc.) it sometimes makes sense to not allow just anyone to see/poke at the whole thing. Military cryptographic systems, IBM mainframes, and many other products use this approach as a layer in their security framework and it is actually pretty successful. If I asked you to break into the a PFSense box you could just Google "PFSense version X.X.X CVEs" and you would probably get a way in if the box was enough out of date, but if you tried to find the same thing for something like the General Dynamics TACLANE you would have a hard time even finding where to start.