RE: Why open source software is more secure

[Chuck Taylor <h00k00k () gmail com>]

All this talk of honesty, I couldn't help but quote this:

"Me? I'm dishonest, and a dishonest man you can always trust to be
dishonest. Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for,
because you can never predict when they're going to do something
incredibly... stupid."

I think this applies.

d3nw0

On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 10:03 +1000, Murda Mcloud wrote:
> How do you quantify more secure?
>
>
> > Also, Marx was an utter fool who had no understanding of human nature,
> > > but that is a discussion for another list.  }8-)
>
> How can you say that when he came out with such insightful pearls as;
> "There is one way to find out if a man is honest; ask him! If he says yes
> you know he's crooked."
> And..
> "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool
> you. He really is an idiot"
>
> Oh, sorry, you meant his brother Karl #;-{)>
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com]
> > > On Behalf Of zenmasterbob123 () gmail com
> > > Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 2:48 AM
> > > To: security-basics () securityfocus com
> > > Subject: Re: Why open source software is more secure
> > >
> > > My first thought as I read this was that Sapran doesn't understand
> > > macroeconomics, free enterprise, and the effect of market forces on
> > > software development.  Secure software sells.  Businesses are willing to
> > > pay a lot more money for something that they percieve will cause them
> > > less headache over time.
> > >
> > >
> > > But on the other hand, Sapran does grasp microeconomics.  Individual
> > > people are cheap.  They will buy something that they think they need, but
> > > they will buy it for the low low price if £3.50 if they can, in spite of
> > > the fact that it has holes the size of Wembley Stadium.  This is
> > > especially true of something that does something that they can't see,
> > > like antivirus software.
> > >
> > >
> > > So if we are really going to have this discussion again, let's turn it on
> > > its side.  What motive does the Open Source developer have to make a
> > > secure product?  or more to the point, what motivation does the Open
> > > Source developer have that the commercial developer does not also have?
> > > Honor?  Pride?  Reputation?  Those exist on both sides of the ledger.  I
> > > postulate that the only difference between the two is that the commercial
> > > developer has the additional motivation of profit.
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, Marx was an utter fool who had no understanding of human nature,
> > > but that is a discussion for another list.  }8-)
-- 
Chuck