Just like proprietary software, Open Source has plenty of pros and cons. First, let's define Free Software:
In the field of information technology and computers, the term open source software ( OSS) refers to software whose source code is made available to third parties for examination. Over time, several different licenses have appeared designed to accompany open source software. Some of them allow users to modify the code and/or use it in other applications. ( WikiPedia )
“Free Software” or Open Source is about freedom, not cost. To understand this term you should think of the word “free” as “free speech” and not “free beer.”
So “Free Software” or “Open Source” does not mean “non-commercial”. A free program should be available for commercial use, commercial development or commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is not uncommon. On the contrary, it is very important for such free software to exist. gnu.org
Critics of open source software often say that its broad development base and open source code are a security risk. But that assessment is unfair, according to Dr Ian Levy, technical director of CESG, a division of the UK's intelligence agency GCHQ, which advises the British government on IT security.
Open source is no worse or better than proprietary software when it comes to security, according to Levy, who debunked some open source security myths and spoke in detail about the real security challenges at the Open Source, Open Standards conference held earlier in London.
Let's look at the Myths
Open source software is more or less secure than proprietary software
“I’ve done a lot of work on this, and there’s no objective evidence. On average, good open source is about as good as good proprietary code, or bad is about as bad as bad proprietary code,” Levy said.
The question of whether software is secure is a very broad one, Levy said. A better approach, he added, is to ask “what security is someone looking for in software” and then ask “what software provides it.”
Many eyes make the code secure
The idea that because the code is open to anyone who can read it, its security is subject to more rigorous checks is questionable, Levy said.
Ask everyone who has downloaded a Linux Kernel: “Who thinks they are responsible for judging the security of the Linux kernel?”
If you download 21 million lines of Linux code and say “I have the code and I looked at it,” so I can convince myself that it is secure, that is nonsense.
Malicious users can read the source code, making it less secure
“Another nonsense. If we look at how malicious users crack software, we will notice that they do not use the source code. All the bugs in closed source products are discovered by crackers who do not have the source. They have an IDA Pro, or an OllyDbg (simply Olly) and work on open and closed executables.”
Anyone can contribute to the code and that's ugly
This claim may be true for some open source projects, but it is not true for most. To mitigate this risk, learn about the open source project and its history and you will be able to judge, Levy said.
Open Source Software means it is open for your organization to use
"Just because it's open source doesn't mean it's free and has no restrictions. The GPL has restrictions and the BSD has somewhat fewer. They may be relevant to you, but there are restrictions."
“Even if licensing doesn’t seem to be a problem, organizations can have intellectual property rights issues.”
Levy gave the example of the storage software Hadoop, which is listed as an Open Source project.
“It’s a patented algorithm. Forget the app. The app may be IP-free, but the algorithm is patented. Do you think you can use it?”
Edited Wednesday, November 30, 9:05 PM to add to the definition of Open Source
