How could something like open source ever be perceived as bad?
The idea, within regulated circles, is that it lacks provenance - there’s no vendor to sue. Many open source licenses also carry an explicit disclaimer of merchantability and fitness for purpose. These are taken seriously, and open-source software is viewed akin to car parts found on the side of the road. They could work but it’s better to let someone else verify.
But in the context of privacy it makes no sense though right? Open source and close source models (depending on vendor) both can be configured in a way that protects privacy of the user. The entire quote is wonky despite your point about companies preferring vendor-based system rather than raw dog oss
how can it not manipulate data and still work? does it do it by magic? absolute L quote by the spokesperson
It will probably sound nice to laypersons but you're right, it has to have access to, at a minimum, a data extract with relevant information to perform it's tasks, although in my experience in the pharmacy IT world, a database view.
but if the source is open, the ay-eyes can find the zero days! /s