Microsoft's Internet Explorer 9 is now out for developers to try out and test -- well kinda/sorta. You see the IE9 Test Drive Platform Preview isn't really a browser is it? IE9 as it is currently available lacks tabs. It lacks a back button and it lacks an address bar. . In my view, it's a crippled browser that does not represent the modern web browsing usage model at all. The idea for Microsoft is to show off new features without the confusion of a full fledged browser -- though why tabs, address bar and tabs would do that is beyond my comprehension. In my experience, it is tabs, the back button and the address bar that actually help developers to determine if something works. There are plenty of security and performance issues related to having multiple tabs open at the same time. By limiting the IE 9 test drive, Microsoft if providing a pristine environment that doesn't reflect the real world. While I understand the motivation for the limited IE9 test drive, when you compare it to how their rival Mozilla is delivering a developer preview, Microsoft's approach makes even less sense to me. The link for this article located at Internet News is no longer available. . The dynamics between Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 and Firefox 3.7 shed light on browser evolution, impacting developers and security protocols significantly. Browser Comparison,Suggested Security Concerns,Web Standards,Developer Preview,Software Analysis. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
This is an excellent lesson in the security problems inherent in trusting proprietary software: After two years of attempting to get the computer based source code for the Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C, defense counsel in State v. Chun were successful in obtaining the code, and had it analyzed by Base One Technologies, Inc. Draeger, the manufacturer maintained that the system was perfect, and that revealing the source code would be damaging to its business. They were right about the second part, of course, because it turned out that the code was terrible.. The link for this article located at is no longer available. . Analysis of vulnerability concerns within closed-source applications and defects discovered in Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C's codebase.. Alcotest Security Flaws, Proprietary Software Issues, Source Code Analysis. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
As Americans go to the polls today, a record number of counties -- almost one fifth by some estimates -- will be tallying the votes on electronic voting machines. But some experts worry that despite rigorous testing, the machines may not be as secure as their makers promise. . . .. As Americans go to the polls today, a record number of counties -- almost one fifth by some estimates -- will be tallying the votes on electronic voting machines. But some experts worry that despite rigorous testing, the machines may not be as secure as their makers promise. "People have jumped on the electronic voting bandwagon, thinking that will solve the problems," said Avi Rubin, a technology security expert and researcher at AT&T Labs in New Jersey. "But these systems are largely untested." The problem, say critics, is that the software which runs the machines is proprietary, and therefore not open to public scrutiny. Without scientists being able to freely analyze the systems, election officials may be leaving themselves open to the possibility of hacking, vote tampering or incorrect calculations. The link for this article located at CNN is no longer available. . Worries grow regarding the prevalence of digital ballot systems, as cybersecurity analysts highlight dangers associated with closed-source applications.. Electronic Voting,Safety Concerns,Hacking Risks,Security Issues. . Anthony Pell
One of the great rallying cries from the Open Source community is the assertion that Open Source Software (OSS) is, by its very nature, less likely to contain security vulnerabilities, including back doors, than closed source software. The reality is . . .. One of the great rallying cries from the Open Source community is the assertion that Open Source Software (OSS) is, by its very nature, less likely to contain security vulnerabilities, including back doors, than closed source software. The reality is far more complex and nuanced. Advocates derive their dogmatic faith in the implicit security of Open Source code from the concept of "peer review," a cornerstone of the scientific process in which published papers and theories are scrutinized by experts other than the authors. The more peers that review the work, the less likely it is that it will contains errors, and the more likely it is to become accepted. The link for this article located at SecurityFocus -- Â Â is no longer available. . The ongoing debate of Open Source versus Closed Source software centers on security, transparency, and community involvement in enhancing software quality and protection. Open Source Benefits, Security Practices, Closed Source Risks. . Anthony Pell
Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.