3 Reasons Why Open Source Software is More Secure than Commercial Software

The popularity of components that are open-source is growing. According to analysts firms like Forrester, Gartner, and 451 Research 80-90 percent of all commercial software developers utilize open source components, and make them an integral element in their applications.

In the wake of recent security vulnerabilities like Heartbleed, Shellshock, and Poodle the debate about the security of open-source components has gotten more heated.

Simplifying Enterprise Application Security Risks:

More Work Must Be Completed

In this article we’d like to claim that open source development is generally more secure than most commercial closed source software.

Here are our arguments:

1. More eyes are watching for ways to fix and find issues. Another argument made by the opponents of open source software is that because the code is public it is easy for hackers to identify weaknesses in security and other weaknesses. However, the counter argument is that the same vulnerabilities will likely to be found quicker by white-hat hackers, users, contributors (many open-source projects are home to hundreds or even thousands of contributors) as well as users (even although the majority of open source users aren't looking over the code at the time they first start using it, they could review it if they find bugs, or wish to modify the code to meet their specific needs).
2. Open source projects patch weaknesses and release patches and new versions much more quickly. If a flaw within an open-source project has been discovered and especially when it's a severe one, the fix is usually made available within a single couple of days. Contrary to commercial vendors, they typically have longer update times. The reasons behind this are numerous:

Commercial vendors could have fewer employees involved in a particular project.

• Software updates from commercial providers are favored by vendors according to financial and commercial aspects
• A lot of commercial vendors have release cycles that range from 6 to 12 months. This means that even if vulnerabilities are resolved, it might take time to bring the fix to the market
• When the open-source code is produced by a commercial business it will be seen as having a lot of publicity. This creates a sense of to correct issues, and could result in better software in the first place.
• Security researchers are often complaining that it takes several months or even years for some companies to address the vulnerabilities they've found. If it takes a long time to address and release the vulnerability security updates, the customers are left vulnerable.

3. Most commercial software makes use of an extensive amount of open source software, however often it's not properly managed.

The modern commercial developers don't create new technologies. They build their own capabilities using (quite lots of) free software components that typically account for more than 80 percent of all number of lines. Therefore commercial software is vulnerable to open source flaws. Unfortunately

A lot of commercial vendors fail to effectively monitor and manage their security for open source software (try to inquire with from your supplier an up-to-date listing of components that are open)

As mentioned above If the commercial vendor is not released frequently, updates to vulnerabilities and bugs can take a long time be included in the product that is released

My conclusion:

Open source projects that are popular are more likely than closed-source commercial software to have bugs and security flaws.

The most popular open-source software projects tend to address security vulnerabilities and bugs and release fixes quicker as commercial programs.

In reality, more than 95% of the vulnerable open source components discovered in the 6450 commercial software projects examined had updated versions that solved the issue.

Hi, My name is Ashley Wilson. I'm living in the USA. I'm working as a developer specializing in IT services with 15+ years of experience.