A Comprehensive and Comparative Analysis of the Patching Behavior of Open Source and Closed Source Software Vendors

G. Schryen
{"title":"A Comprehensive and Comparative Analysis of the Patching Behavior of Open Source and Closed Source Software Vendors","authors":"G. Schryen","doi":"10.1109/IMF.2009.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While many theoretical arguments against or in favor of open source and closed source software development have been presented, the empirical basis for the assessment of arguments is still weak. Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a comprehensive empirical investigation of the patching behavior of software vendors/communities of widely deployed open source and closed source software packages, including operating systems, database systems, web browsers, email clients, and office systems. As the value of any empirical study relies on the quality of data available, this paper also discusses in detail data issues, explains to what extent the empirical analysis can be based on vulnerability data contained in the NIST National Vulnerability Database, and shows how data on vulnerability patches was collected by the author to support this study. The results of the analysis suggest that it is not the particular software development style that determines patching behavior, but rather the policy of the particular software vendor.","PeriodicalId":370893,"journal":{"name":"2009 Fifth International Conference on IT Security Incident Management and IT Forensics","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2009 Fifth International Conference on IT Security Incident Management and IT Forensics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IMF.2009.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

While many theoretical arguments against or in favor of open source and closed source software development have been presented, the empirical basis for the assessment of arguments is still weak. Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a comprehensive empirical investigation of the patching behavior of software vendors/communities of widely deployed open source and closed source software packages, including operating systems, database systems, web browsers, email clients, and office systems. As the value of any empirical study relies on the quality of data available, this paper also discusses in detail data issues, explains to what extent the empirical analysis can be based on vulnerability data contained in the NIST National Vulnerability Database, and shows how data on vulnerability patches was collected by the author to support this study. The results of the analysis suggest that it is not the particular software development style that determines patching behavior, but rather the policy of the particular software vendor.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开源和闭源软件厂商补丁行为的综合对比分析
虽然已经出现了许多反对或支持开源和闭源软件开发的理论争论,但是评估争论的经验基础仍然很薄弱。为了弥补这一研究缺口,本文对广泛部署的开源和闭源软件包(包括操作系统、数据库系统、web浏览器、电子邮件客户端和办公系统)的软件供应商/社区的补丁行为进行了全面的实证调查。由于任何实证研究的价值都取决于可用数据的质量,本文还详细讨论了数据问题,说明了在多大程度上可以基于NIST国家漏洞数据库中的漏洞数据进行实证分析,并展示了作者是如何收集漏洞补丁数据来支持本研究的。分析的结果表明,决定打补丁行为的不是特定的软件开发风格,而是特定软件供应商的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Workshop: Digital Discovery with Bootable CDs Self-Forensics Through Case Studies of Small-to-Medium Software Systems Technique to Interrogate an Image of RAM Fast User Classifying to Establish Forensic Analysis Priorities Safe-Keeping Digital Evidence with Secure Logging Protocols: State of the Art and Challenges
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1