2009/10/14 SC-L Reader Dave Aronson securecoding2d...@davearonson.com
Andreas Saurwein Franci Gonçalves saurw...@gmail.com wrote
(rearranged into correct order):
2009/10/13 Bobby Miller b.g.mil...@gmail.com
The obvious difference is parts. In manufacturing, things are
assembled
from well-known, well-specified, tested parts. Hmmm
Thats the idea of libraries. Well known, well specified, well tested
parts.
Well, whatever.
Ideally, yes. However, programmers love to reinvent the wheel. It's
MUCH easier, both to do and to get away with, in software than in
hardware... and often necessary.
Need a bolt of at least a given length and strength, less than a given
diameter? There are standard thread sizes, and people make bolts of
most common threadings and lengths, for purchase at reasonable prices,
at places easily found, and you can be fairly certain that any given
one of them will do the job quite well.
Need a function for your program? If it's as common as a bolt, it's
probably already built into the very language. If it's nearly as
common, maybe there's a fairly standard library for it... and if
you're very lucky, it's not too buggy or brittle. Otherwise, it's
probably going to be much cheaper (which is all your management
probably cares about) to just code the damn thing yourself, than to
research who makes such a thing, which ones there are, who says which
one is how reliable, which ones have licensing terms your company
finds palatable, and justifying your choice to management. Lord help
you if it requires money, because then you have to justify it to a
higher degree, get the beancounters involved, budgetary authority from
possibly multiple layers of manglement, and spend the rest of your
days filling out purchase orders.
If you do wind up coding it yourself, is the company then going to
make that piece of functionality available to the world separately,
whether for profit or open source? N times out of N+1, for very large
values of N, no way!
Will they at least make it available *internally*, so that *they*
don't have to reinvent the wheel *next* time? Again, N times out of
N+1, for almost as large values of N, no.
-Dave
Exactly thats the point. Going a bit further, for every piece of hardware
engineering, there is almost always a legal, worldwide or at least national
standard to follow. This is inexistent in software.
As long as anybody with at least one healthy finger is allowed to write and
sell software, the current situation will not change.
Make software development an engineering discipline with all the rights
and obligations of other engineering sciences.
No more coding without a license. Point. This would change the landscape of
bits and bytes in a dramatic way. But it requires the support of the
governments worldwide.
My 2 cents (me too would have to get back to college and study some more,
although having 25+ years of software development experience)
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
___
