Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Outlining a World Where Software Makers Are Liable For Flaws

Posted by timothy on from the mattress-has-a-pea-beneath dept.

CowboyRobot writes with this piece at the ACM Queue, in which "Poul-Henning Kamp makes the argument for software liability laws. 'We have to do something that actually works, as opposed to accepting a security circus in the form of virus or malware scanners and other mathematically proven insufficient and inefficient efforts. We are approaching the point where people and organizations are falling back to pen and paper for keeping important secrets, because they no longer trust their computers to keep them safe.'"

5 of 508 comments (clear)

  1. Sure by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It will just cost 100x more, just like healthcare with the torts. Time to take out software developer insurance, similar to the healthcare insurance of approximately 1 million dollars a year paid by doctors these days.

    --
    This space for rent.
    1. Re:Sure by dohnut · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, licensed engineers just cover their asses better.

      Or do you think the engineer should be held liable when someone parks a 30 ton vehicle on a bridge rated for 10 tons and the bridge fails? Well, then why should a software developer be held liable when the software asks you to enter your name and, instead, you feed it data which causes a buffer overrun which allows you to root the database server and steal everyone's credit card numbers? If you would have just entered your name correctly that never would have happened. A clear case of misuse if I ever saw one.

      I think software developers should be liable but the liabilities need to be defined first. And if someone hacks the software outside of the scope of the security standards and practices that have been set by the government, put in place correctly by the developer and verified by the assigned regulatory bodies then there is no liability if something goes wrong.

      Meanwhile the cost and time required to develop software will skyrocket. If you need any evidence of that, just look at how much time and money it takes to build a bridge these days.

      --
      Stupider like a fox! - H.S.
  2. You can't trust code ... by LordNimon · · Score: 5, Informative

    "You can't trust code that you did not totally create yourself."

    I can't trust the code that I did totally create myself, either.

    --
    And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
    To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
  3. People need to stop equating software to buildings by Derekloffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can overbuild a house, it generally makes it stronger. You over code a piece of software it just adds to the number of possible points of failure. The two really aren't good analogies for each other. That doesn't even consider things like how maintenance of both is handled, interactions of hardware, varying setups, and just simple complexity.

  4. Re:Another law? No thanks. by 1729 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Funny, none of my firearms actually say don't point at face

    It's usually engraved at the end of the barrel. Look closely.