Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source Code Isn't a Warranty (opensource.com)

Posted by timothy on from the you-get-to-keep-and-fix-both-pieces dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Automotive software issues such as the Jeep hack and Volkswagen cheating on emissions tests have made headlines this year, which means the public is thinking about software in cars like never before. Some experts have argued that mandating that such software be open source is a solution to the problem. In an article on Opensource.com, Ben Cotton writes that although there are definite benefits to public scrutiny of the software, code visibility alone is no guarantee. It's an important thing to bear in mind, because "Open, therefore secure" is an easy straw man to knock down.

3 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. However.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The more insight into code, the less likely companies will do what VW did because its open to public scrutiny. I think we should be focusing on the "Open, therefore open to scrutiny" than the misconception of "Open, therefore secure".

  2. "Open, therefore secure" by gQuigs · · Score: 4, Interesting

    or maybe...

    Open, therefore not illegal to review?

  3. Re:Guarantee by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But it allows you to create guarantee because you can audit it.

    For closed source software, you have to trust the supplier and their guarantee.

    Do you trust yourself or your proprietary software vendor more? It can be a hard choice in some situations.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!