3 ms·
In particular the people who study and work at the government funded European universities tuition free. Most universities have a computer science department,
by tossandthrow 1y ago
In particular the people who study and work at the government funded European universities tuition free.
Most universities have a computer science department, that has a security group.
As a part of European CS bachelor's students study the Linux kernel.
- amelius 1y agoCS students are not expected to do security audits in production software. And if they do, it will certainly not be exhaustive. Nor will it be at a pace in which software is typically released.
- guappa 1y agoIt's funny that you think proprietary code is audited.
- amelius 1y agoWell, I suppose there is a tighter control on who is allowed to commit.
- GTP 1y agoYes, but you have less people that can look at such commits. It's not so easy to claim that one is intrinsically more secure than the other. As someone in the cybersecurity field, I prefer FOSS software. But the situation is more nuanced than how you present it.
- guappa 1y agoNo there isn't. In fact proprietary projects are very happy to run "npm" or "pip install" or the java/go equivalents and install whatever. I expect most projects don't even check they're not violating licenses or ever audit any dependency… let alone do a security check on who the authors are. Also just FYI, russians are not stupid. If they want to contribute malware they won't do it from their kgb email address. They will create a fake identity with a very standard WASP name.
- amelius 1y agoI don't think that's true. Accountability will give proprietary projects an extra edge in terms of security.
- tossandthrow 1y agoThat is also why I wrote people who study and work. Security is generally better in linux based ecosystems than windows. Microsoft also don't do sec audits - if you want a sec audit on your stack then you buy it. It just turns out that it is much easier to audit a Linux based stack that a Windows based one