There’s been a long-running debate over open source and security, and it goes something like this:
Pro: Open source is awesome! Given enough eyes, all bugs are shallow. This is why open source software is inherently more secure.
Con: Hackers can see the code! They’ll look at the source code and find ways to exploit it. This is why open source software is inherently more insecure.
And on and on… ad nauseum. There are a variety of studies that each side can finger to help state their case. The problem as I see it, is that we’re not even talking about the same thing. If someone says open source software is more or less secure, what are they actually talking about?
Read more at OSEN