Miller on Mac OS X, Chrome, Firefox, Economics
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Mar 2009 13:51 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
Privacy, Security, Encryption Fresh from winning the PWN2OWN contest yesterday, Charlie Miller has been interviewed by ZDNet. He talks about how Mac OS X is a very simple operating system to exploit due to the lack of any form of anti-exploit features. He also explains that the underlying operating system is much more important in creating a successful exploit than the bowser, why Chrome is so hard to hack, and many other things.
E-mail Print r 11   · Read More · 138 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/gc3
Thread beginning with comment 354187
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
TBPrince
Member since:
2005-07-06

My point was that while Safari and Chrome share the same (open-source) rendering engine, result is much different. Which was a variant of what you meant when you wrote that "Granted, no source is going to magically be of high quality", wether open or closed source, I'd say. Let's consider that a notice to people who would solve all problems by "open-sourcing".

Of course, Safari is not open-source.

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I may be reading it backwards when you take the time that an open source license does not automatically make software better quality then point to a browser with a FOSS core engine and several layers of proprietary on top. Chrome using the same core indicates that the FOSS component of it is solid. The exploitable flaw being in the proprietary Safari layers wrapped around the core would seem to support the theory of lower quality in closed licenses.

I don't think an open license is going to make a bad software idea magically better but when comparing general open source against general proprietary, quality looks a little suspect where peer review is lacking.

Reply Parent Score: 2