[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       isn
Subject:    Re: [ISN] Backing Up Oracle's "Unbreakable" Vow
From:       InfoSec News <isn () c4i ! org>
Date:       2002-01-29 8:24:26
[Download RAW message or body]

Forwarded from: njharman <njharman@notanothercorporation.com>

[Originally sent on January 23, 2002, cleaning up the queue. -  WK]

I'm surprised no one else commented on this.  I hope it is not a
common viewpoint among the list readership.

> >> Calling your code "Unbreakable" is like having a big bull's-eye on
> >> your products and your firewall. Obviously, nobody wants to be a
> >> target.
>
> If I'm going to buy a secure DB, I'm going to pick whichever
> company has the biggest balls -

Any reason you wouldn't take the more direct route and select the DB
with the best/longest security record?

> Sorry dudes - that's Oracle right now.  If they say "Unbreakable",
> whether or not it's true, the fact that everyone knows it's a red
> rag makes me and probably ever other oracle customer very happy
> because we all think they think they know what they're doing.

So, you prefer "Security through Marketing"?  If that's true,
Microsoft has very many applications you might be greatly interested
in.

> > I for one only trust open source software to have any security at
> > all, and only then because if required to, I could audit the code,
> > or subcontract someone to do so.
>
> That's about the most amusing thing I ever heard.  If you ever
> spent even as little as 10 seconds looking at the actual source,
> you'd notice that no matter what product it is, it's been cobbled
> together by a dozen or more benevolent hackers who combined had
> only half a clue what they were doing, and even less about how it
> should be done.

This is not true and demonstrates that you must have spent no more
than 10 seconds looking at open source code.  Much opensource is like
you say.  Many other opensource projects are of excellent quality.  
With opensource you look at the the code to determine where it lies.  
Proprietary software quality can only be deduced from secondary
indicators (bugs, exploits) or if you're really guallable by listening
to the sales/marketing person.  There are reason's several opensource
projects dominate in their respective markets.  And no it's not that
they have well-funded marketing campaigns.

How much closed source code have you looked at to determine it it's
been cobbled together by a dozen or more indifferent programmers
trying to meet a deadline?

> And you "trust" this?  Have you *any* idea how easy it is to
> insert deliberate yet heavily obfuscated backdoors?  What's the
> chance of an open source programmer getting sacked if they're
> busted?  Hmmm.  So what deterant is there??

Um, any idea how easy it is to insert deliberate backdoors, bad
'hacks', hard coded passwords, extremly stupid programmer errors, etc.
in closed source code and have no one the wiser?  What's the chance of
even knowing the names of programmers who contributed to a closed
source piece of code? One of the many deterents is that everything is
in the open for everyone to scruntinize and one or more people have
actually taken responsibility by putting their names onto their code.  
Job's are easy to come by, reputations once sullied are difficult to
clean.

btw Oracle has decent security not because of some advertising but
rather (at least in part) due to their good internal security
practices which you can read about in a recent interview with their
security person (forget her actually title)



-
ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org

To unsubscribe email majordomo@attrition.org with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY
of the mail.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]