In Case You Were Wondering: Software Will Remain Insecure
from the that-must-have-been-a-difficult-prediction dept
It’s fun when people start coming out with absolutely obvious predictions for the future. Take, for example, this claim that software will remain insecure. Was there really anyone who thought otherwise? Our existing software infrastructure is layer upon layer of complexity, where every attempt at securing something probably just opens up more holes. Of course, this same guy is advocating that everyone sue Bill Gates for “the damage he has caused” from continually releasing insecure software. So, the claim is that software will remain insecure, but we should sue makers of insecure software? Sounds like a recipe for an awful lot of lawsuits — and the sort of liability that would make developing software a pretty costly business.
Comments on “In Case You Were Wondering: Software Will Remain Insecure”
One more reason I'm getting out...
Sounds like a recipe for an awful lot of lawsuits — and the sort of liability that would make developing software a pretty costly business.
Between this attitude and the patent-crazy companies, it just isn’t worth the pain for me to stay in the game anymore. Five years ago, I would have never dreamed I would be leaving software development; now I can barely wait for my opportunity to escape.
Re: Software Secure Liablity
I can understand if open source had security issues, although I think it’s more stable than purchased software, you know who I mean. My feeling is if I purchase a defective product from say Walmart, I bring it back. The same should go for purchased software, if it’s defective i.e. security issues, then the company should be held liable and the consumer entitled to a full refund.
Bad way to look at it
You cannot look at software like its a walmart product. Its like buying something from Walmart, having random people tinker with it and break it, then want walmart to return it for you. If software were left alone and hackers and spammers didnt go after security holes, then there would be no problem.
Its like buying a car with a full warranty, giving it to random people to drive the crap out of and destroy the transmission, then expecting the company to take the car back because its defective.
Re: Bad way to look at it
No, if I buy a product from Walmart that is designed to hold sensitive data, as often times happens with software (i.e. passwords, autocomplete for web pages and other such info), and someone picks it up, shakes it a little bit, and it falls open, then I can and will hold Walmart liable, the same should go for all software, if it makes an honest attempt at thwarting things, which most doesn’t even come close to qualifying as an honest attempt, then they shouldn’t be held responsible for their failure, but if it’s lax security because they didn’t pay attn to it, yet advertise it as “the most secure” blah blah, then of course they should be held liable.