Microsoft Goes Open Source?
Interesting to see that Microsoft is now asking external coders (ie. hackers) if they have any patch suggestions!
This eWeek article gives the corporate-speak spin: "The formalization of Redmond's new Security Update Validation Program clears the way for external patch testers to get "limited and controlled access" to security updates ahead of public release." But hey, aren't they just relying on un-paid volunteers to patch their software. Security experts don't like it much, because it smells of open-source. But Bradley's Small Business Server Blog made some good points about security in MS software back in December, and the fact that any and all browsers could benefit from some added security screening -- especially from real world users.
But Microsoft is still using an open source model, I say. Who the hell cares if they sign an NDA, if Microsoft isn't paying them?
This eWeek article gives the corporate-speak spin: "The formalization of Redmond's new Security Update Validation Program clears the way for external patch testers to get "limited and controlled access" to security updates ahead of public release." But hey, aren't they just relying on un-paid volunteers to patch their software. Security experts don't like it much, because it smells of open-source. But Bradley's Small Business Server Blog made some good points about security in MS software back in December, and the fact that any and all browsers could benefit from some added security screening -- especially from real world users.
But Microsoft is still using an open source model, I say. Who the hell cares if they sign an NDA, if Microsoft isn't paying them?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home