Hacker News Reader

Why are you assuming that only non open source devices are vulnerable? We've seen enough open source vulnerabilities in broad daylight to know that open source does not mean secure.

View on HN

You have it backwards. They're assuming non-open source is backdoor'ed. Not that open source isn't backdoor'ed.

I don't have it backwards. That is what I said. They are assuming non open source is backdoored. That does not mean open source is not also backdoored.

No, you you said

>Why are you assuming that only non open source devices are vulnerable?

Yes, the word "only" is causing the confusion.

Open source is auditable, and tends to get fixed.

I don't think you can say it tends to get fixed because you don't know the ratio between the number of vulnerabilities and the ones that get fixed. Closed source can also be audited. Auditing code for companies is an entire business model.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com