3 ms·
How to fix the military's software SNAFU
- wolverine876 3y agoThis article is the third I've seen where proprietary vendors, after the xz backdoor, try to claim that FOSS is inherently insecure. For example, > the U.S. military is shipping software that is insecure and contains many known software vulnerabilities—CVEs, in software-speak. If you use propriety applications, it's true that you'll have fewer CVEs. And of course, nobody at another company ever discovered a backdoor in their proprietary applications. (In case you don't read the tone: /s)
- wredcoll 3y ago> The second approach is organizational. For example, Iron Bank currently offers only one price to its users: free. While this may seem “low cost,” software companies have no motivation to provide secure and high-quality components to Iron Bank because they cannot charge. If Iron Bank created “private” repositories that allowed companies could charge for access to high-quality software building blocks, it seems likely that Iron Bank images would have dramatically fewer known vulnerabilities. Ah yes, because this is historically what has happened.
- wolverine876 3y agoYes, it's laughable for anyone whose in in IT, and the author is in IT. It's nonsense. And then see yet another article making the same argument: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39947843 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39947843