That's an extremely good question, and points to the fact that all code has its flaws. Increase the code = multiply the amount of inherent - even if often obscure - flaws.
How do you solve that? (It's one of the worst downsides of coding anything - by the very act of imperfect humans writing code, they're forever playing whack-a-mole with the end result. I'd go further and say that until humans get better at it, even computers built to future proof the code written upon them won't be able to, either. But getting computers to perform security tests using every possibility that we can't fathom nor compute might be the only answer. A better one from the beginning would have been for coders to pass their handiwork straight on to the hackers hired to find its vulnerabilities before it was ever put out into the world. But software didn't start out with security in mind - and the entire world is paying the price for that shortsightedness now.)
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
Re: IMO you can't solve security by adding more stuff
Date: 2015-11-09 08:37 am (UTC)How do you solve that? (It's one of the worst downsides of coding anything - by the very act of imperfect humans writing code, they're forever playing whack-a-mole with the end result. I'd go further and say that until humans get better at it, even computers built to future proof the code written upon them won't be able to, either. But getting computers to perform security tests using every possibility that we can't fathom nor compute might be the only answer. A better one from the beginning would have been for coders to pass their handiwork straight on to the hackers hired to find its vulnerabilities before it was ever put out into the world. But software didn't start out with security in mind - and the entire world is paying the price for that shortsightedness now.)