Reply
Should Vendors Close All Security Holes?
Old 05-15-2007, 12:10 AM Should Vendors Close All Security Holes?
TimSchroeder's Avatar
Admin/Owner

Posts: 6,142
Location: Orlando, FL
johnmeister writes to tell us that InfoWorld's Roger Grimes is finding it hard to completely discount a reader's argument to only patch minimum or low security bugs when they are publicly discovered. "The reader wrote to say that his company often sits on security bugs until they are publicly announced or until at least one customer complaint is made. Before you start disagreeing with this policy, hear out the rest of his argument. 'Our company spends significantly to root out security issues,' says the reader. 'We train all our programmers in secure coding, and we follow the basic tenets of secure programming design and management. When bugs are reported, we fix them. Any significant security bug that is likely to be high risk or widely used is also immediately fixed. But if we internally find a low- or medium-risk security bug, we often sit on the bug until it is reported publicly. We still research the bug and come up with tentative solutions, but we don't patch the problem.'"Read more of this story at Slashdot.
</img>


Read More about: Should Vendors Close All Security Holes?...
TimSchroeder is offline
Reply With Quote
View Public Profile Visit TimSchroeder's homepage!
 
When You Register, These Ads Go Away!
Reply     « Reply to Should Vendors Close All Security Holes?
 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




   
RSS Feed  Feeds: RSS   JS   XML
RSS Feed  Feeds for this forum: RSS   JS   XML

 


Page generated in 0.11006 seconds with 12 queries