Home page logo
/

basics logo Security Basics mailing list archives

Re: A Question of Quality
From: "Daniël W. Crompton" <daniel.crompton () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:53:40 +0100

2008/11/2 Robert Hajime Lanning <robert.lanning () gmail com>:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Yousef Syed <yousef.syed () gmail com> wrote:
Why isn't Quality Assumed?
Why isn't Security Assumed?
Why are these concepts thought of as add ons to Applications and Services?

Why do they need to be specified, when they should be taken for granted?

I believe one of the issues is, pride of ownership in the end product.

A lot of the coding is now outsourced to cheap code houses.  These people
do not have ownership or attribution.  They have no reason to take any extra
steps, that are not specified in the contract.  If it is not in the
contract, they
are not being paid for it.

I have to disagree with you there, even if you examine code that comes
from internally where they have pride of ownership there are many
security considerations which are only later applied to the product.
Many times it's the case that security aspects are tacked on later,
rather than being considered from the outset.

D.

blaze your trail

--
redhat

http://feeds.feedburner.com/GeneralMusing


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault