On 02/03/2014 06:09 PM, John Adams wrote: [...]
Additionally, your statement of: "Closed-Source software cannot be secured" -- I prefer open source software but I disagree that it cannot completely be secured. It depends only on the motivation, financial resources, and merit of the company attempting to secure said software. Just because you don't happen to get a look at the source code doesn't make this a definitive statement. There are numerous examples of commercial software being immensely hard to defeat.
I don't know the name for it, but there's definitely a misleading (or misled) rhetorical device in the paragraph above. I see it everytime someone mentions the truism about free software being the obvious foundation for security software. I'm not a security expert so let me explain with an analogy:
Because of an injury, Django Reinhardt only used two fingers of his left hand to play guitar. He's a pioneering jazz guitarist. That's a pretty cool anecdote.
On an unrelated note, go to any serious guitar studio and you will find that students are taught to use more than two fingers when trying to master the guitar. There isn't a guitar teacher in the world that would knowingly limit his/her students to develop with _fewer_ resources than they actually have.
But I bet if there were a large number of guitar teachers who-- for historical reasons-- had tragically been taught to play with only two fingers, they'd constantly be reminded everyone else that you _can_ indeed become a great guitarist even with a horrible technique. That'd be a detriment to guitar pedagogy, as I believe it's a detriment to creating and maintaining security software.
-Jonathan -- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
