LinuxSecurity.com
Share your story
The central voice for Linux and Open Source security news
Home News Topics Advisories HOWTOs Features Newsletters About Register

Welcome!
Sign up!
EnGarde Community
Login
Polls
How would you rate the importance of default settings in security?
 
Advisories
Community
Linux Events
Linux User Groups
Link to Us
Security Center
Book Reviews
Security Dictionary
Security Tips
SELinux
White Papers
Featured Blogs
Emily Ratliff: OS Security
DanWalsh LiveJournal
Security Bloggers Network
Latest Newsletters
Linux Advisory Watch: July 4th, 2008
Linux Security Week: June 30th, 2008
Subscribe
LinuxSecurity Newsletters
E-mail:
Choose Lists:
About our Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Get the LinuxSecurity news you want faster with RSS
Powered By

  
11 Open Source Projects cleared as Secure? Print E-mail
User Rating:      How can I rate this item?
Source: CNET.com - Posted by Ryan Berens   
Vendors/Products Coverity, which creates automated source-code analysis tools, announced late Monday its first list of open-source projects that have been certified as free of security defects.

Eleven projects made the list: Amanda, NTP, OpenPAM, OpenVPN, Overdose, Perl, PHP, Postfix, Python, Samba, and TCL.

This list of projects may seem fair and equitable. And certainly, Perl, Postfix, Amanda and others can be very secure. But PHP? Granted, the project is done with a contract from DHS as well as association with Stanford University. And their certification boasts...
strong requirements especially for moving up the "rungs" on their "ladder." Is it all that it cracks up to be?

This ladder, however systematic, seems on the light end and is driven solely by Coverity's own logic and vocabulary. Some of the descriptions as to their criteria include that "projects progress to the next rung by selecting a set of official contacts to represent the project to Coverity." There is little to state what criteria is used, why this matter and how a project gains the next "rung."

This seems like a good effort, but the arbitrary nature of the rational in what actually makes these projects secure seems a little watered down. Heck, anyone can make a ladder...

Thoughts?

Read this full article at CNET.com

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site.. Such material will be removed.
Name:
Title:
Comment:

Code:* Code

Powered by AkoComment!

 
< Prev   Next >
    
Partner:

 

Latest Features
Security Features of Firefox 3.0
Review: The Book of Wireless
April 2008 Open Source Tool of the Month: sudo
Open Source Tool of March: ZoneMinder
Meet the Anti-Nmap: PSAD
Open Source Tool of February: Nmap!
HowTo: Secure your Ubuntu Apache Web Server
Yesterday's Edition

QuickLinks: Comunity , HOWTOs , Blogs , Features , Book Reviews , Networking ,
  Security Projects ,   Latest News ,  Newsletters ,  SELinux ,  Privacy ,  Home,
 Hardening ,   About Us,   Advertise,   Legal Notice,   RSS,   Guardian Digital

(c)Copyright 2008 Guardian Digital, Inc. All rights reserved.