Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dragon Curve
Please tell me you're not that naive. Fair enough you want to protect your property - but there are laws for that. I'm sure there's nothing amazing about your PHP that is so revolutionary that it will be stolen.
|
If there is nothing revolutionary in our system, I wonder why all our features are more advanced than any of the competition. It has nothing to do with me scripting some amazing PHP, its the features and how we make them work which is the thing we protect.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dragon Curve
Moreover, I do love open-source and there's definitely nothing wrong with that. I'm sure your servers are running Linux/FreeBSD, which is open-source. You use PHP, which is open-source. You use MySQL, which is open-source. I'm not required to read through the source of every application I run because I am confident that it has been audited correctly by the open-source community several times over. But it certainly helps when I am curious as to how a certain application is working.
It's also rather useful when developing FOR a certain application. For example, developing an Apache module - the source is essential.
|
It was obvious you love open-source. And I have never said there is anything wrong with it. And yes, we use FreeBSD, PHP, MySQL. All open-source. Whats your point? Because we use those we have to understand that its essential to use the open-source system for anything we do? You do not need to know how NATS works. If a client of ours has a specific question about the inner workings we TELL them. We do not have to give them the whole source of NATS. The is intellectual property and any way we can we will protect it.
BTW, there are books about writing Apache modules. The source is actually not essential. ;)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dragon Curve
And finally, you've proved you have NO clue about security. Go subscribe to bugtraq and see the spread of vulnerabilities. Linux/FreeBSD/OpenBSD .. hell ANY of the Unixes haven't had a major remote vulnerability in yonks. Lets see about Windows - two DCOM vulnerabilities in the last year? More IIS vulnerabilities. The list goes on.
You'd have to be absolutely out of your mind to try to tell me, that closed-source applications are somehow more secure. The reason bugs are often found in open-source applications, is because they are much more easily audited. So while the open-source applications have the non-critical bugs ironed out of them, people are stumbling across MAJOR vulnerabilities in things like Windows all the time.
How about the fundamental flaw in the Windows messaging system that allows anyone to escalate privileges? Shatter?
|
Did I _EVER_ say windows was more secure or had less bugs? Stop interpreting what I write. _YOU_ said that the reason you like open-source is that people know the app is FLAWLESS. FreeBSD and/or Linux has been open-source for a long time, who cares if there were no major security holes in the OS itself for over a year. Does that mean its flawless?? Far from it. Also, you come here and compare flaws in FreeBSD/Linux with IIS for Windows?!? There is more to unix system than the OS itself. SSH, APACHE, MySQL, sendmail (oh god sendmail), and what not. Did you forget about those? They all have had security problems in the past, and plenty of them.
My point was that open-source software is FAR FROM flawless like YOU claimed the whole point of open-source would be.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dragon Curve
Clearly, you have no idea what I'm talking about because you haven't researched that much into security. But trust me, I have. I'm not going to sit here and argue what OS is more secure or something stupid like that. I'm just going to say, that open-source makes me feel much safer on the boxes I use.
|
Of course, yet again, I am stupid, have no clue, you know it better, I have never heard of security, and am in general a stupid idiot which does not have a brain.
So sorry I pissed you off so much... LOL