printer friendly version

Of security and open source software

Muggie van Staden. “To say open source is less or more secure than anything else would be to miss the point.”

When it comes to open source software, the topic of security is always hotly debated. It seems that in addition to it being free, open source software is inherently less secure than what is available through its proprietary counterpart. At least that is what the cynics would have you believe.

But just like the Free Fallacy (patent pending), the security one is not any less incorrect. The fact remains that there are security risks associated to all software code. Just like any piece of hardware will eventually fail, so too does any piece of software inherently have a security risk. These risks can either be used for nefarious purposes or are as rudimentary as typos in programming syntax. However, irrespective of the platform used, companies need to mitigate their risk.

More secure, less secure?

To say open source is less or more secure than anything else would be to miss the point. All software has bugs and security issues are everywhere. How the platforms deal with these security issues are what sets them apart.

With proprietary software you have a small pool of developers that have access to the source code. The theory is that this closed system is inherently more secure because you are limiting the amount of people who can see inside the code and identify holes. Yet, as is evident through a well-known organisation that frequently releases patches on Tuesdays, this still does not mean the system is completely secure.

The very nature of open source means that any person has access to its inner workings. Certainly, there are many flavours and customisations to it but that is a result of the greater number of people who are developing solutions for open source software. Security holes become a bit of a numbers game here. Given the amount of open source developers and communities in the world, the chances of them picking up bugs in code are significantly higher than the closed pool of developers with proprietary systems.

Backdoor in

Think about it. If the developer of a proprietary system builds a backdoor in it that leaves an organisation open for attack, who would be able to check it? Only the limited number of developers that have access to that source code can monitor it. And once a hack has been discovered, it is often too late for the company in question as the damage would have already been done.

On the other side of the coin, you have open source developers who constantly monitoring code for malicious backdoors, bugs, or even simple typos in syntax. This community becomes a significant extension to the internal development team of a company and provide support around the clock, 365 days a year.

Greater good

Open source is pushing people to work together to make solutions better. It is one of the ultimate communities of interest. The developers work together for the greater good of the software and share bug fixes freely and quickly with each other. This fast turnaround time can hardly be matched in proprietary developers due to the sheer difference in numbers.

And while everybody loves a good underdog story of one against many, when it comes to security I know I prefer to have the many on my side working together to ensure my system stays as up to date as possible, while reducing the amount of security bugs.

Share this article:

Further reading: