The Distribution of Software - Report Example

Introduction: The distribution of software is conducted through two approaches: open source and closed source software development. In the creation of an operating system, trust and security are interrelated and are a significant requirement. The operating system must be reliable for the users and there must be no security holes in it. The measure of trust and security of an operating system can be attained through assessment of the availability of certain traits. In view of these traits, we can reach a justified opinion as to which software development model is better for creating an operating system that is trusted and secure. The traits are as follows: Availability of Source Code: In the commercial closed source model of software development, although the software is purchased from the owner yet the source code is not made available to the purchaser as the software is considered the intellectual property of the owner. In the open source software development model, however, the software is not only free but also the source code is included within the software product distribution. The open source license allows the users to make changes, customize and improve the software product and even redistribute it. Complete information about the changes made to the software is made available to the other developers. As the software is developed with the collaboration of many individuals, it becomes the intellectual property of all those who developed and modified it. Bug Removal: Software products are hardly ever free of bugs. Although the development team removes the obvious bugs which they encounter during the testing phase, yet the bugs are never removed entirely. The testing phase of software is time limited, and so are the test cases. The undetected bugs that surface during the actual execution pose a problem for the user. In a proprietary software product, in case a bug is found, only the developers who developed the software can fix it as only they have access rights to the code. Thus, a certain level of dependability on the vendor is always present. In open source software, since the code is fully accessible and modifiable, the bugs can be spotted easily and removed rapidly. When given enough reviewers the bugs become somewhat visible (Raymond, 2000). Even in cases where the necessary skills are absent in-house, since the code is available, any third party can be contracted to remove a bug. Level of Security: If the source code of a product is available to user, he/she can select the security approach and allocate the respective resources. In view of this, a limitation is present to the security features in the closed source model. On the contrary, in an open source model, the ownership of security lies with the users. Any security approach that may not be present in the proprietary software can be enabled in the open source product. Secondly, by having access to the source code, the security flaws of a software system can be detected easily. So with reference to the situation where the intention is to exploit the flaws rather than fixing them, this fact might suggest a weakness of open source system. However, contrary to this seemingly obvious belief, debugging and fixing of an exploit does not require expert skills and extensive time as compared to narrowing down a flaw, analyzing the exploitation mechanism and devising an attack. Furthermore, in contrast to the only few programmers of the closed source model who can access the code, the large number of developers in the open source model can fix a flaw more rapidly. Secondly, the security hole detected in software is only considered to be fixed by the closed source development team if the priority and urgency of the problem are high enough to get noticed. Level of Customization: The proprietary software applications have a scope specified within which the application can be customized or else get adapted to. It never goes beyond the scope. The open source applications allow unlimited customization if the required skills are known. Thus the applications can be tuned to user’s needs. Possibility of Interface Language Translation: By having access to the source code, the usability of the software product can be increased by translating the interface of the software in a language that is easy for the users to use. Owing to low guarantee of generating profit, the large proprietary software vendors are usually reluctant in translating their product in a language that is not widely used. Vendor Dependency: Proprietary software vendors can ‘lock’ users into their products by ensuring that the formats are not readily compatible with the potential rivals (Richard, 2006). Vendors may then increase the price of product upgrades or support without too great a risk of losing existing customers. It may happen that the vendors of the proprietary software lock their users to their product. The cost of switching to an alternative solution is too costly due to the incompatibility of files and applications with the possible rivals. Even when the vendors raise their prices for additional upgrades and support, the customers are forced to comply. Open source software products use the open standardized format; therefore the possibility of being ‘locked’ to the vendor is minimal. Even in cases where a standard is not followed, it can still be retrieved from the documentation. On the contrary, for a nonstandard format used in the closed source software, the product has to be reverse-engineered, which is not only lengthy, costly and burdensome process but also requires to be repeated in case the format is changed. Survival in untoward situations: It is not unusual for a proprietary software vendor to stop working or it being purchased by some other company. In such cases, it may happen that the software products owned by these vendors become unavailable, unsupported and are offered no upgrades. This leads the users to need an alternative which could be too costly in case the users are ‘locked’ to the vendor. Such situations may arise even with the large companies where on releasing a new version, support for the previous version ceases to exist. In the open source software, such unreliable situations are considerably less. As the user owns the source code, in case an in-house development team does not have the required skills, an interested third party can be located from the development community worldwide and contracted on economic terms for software maintenance. Cost: Most of the open source products are either free of cost or are very affordable to buy. Mostly this is a major motivation behind adoption of an open source alternative to a closed source solution. Even after purchasing proprietary software, the user may have to pay for monthly/yearly support subscriptions or upgrades. Even though the open source alternative may require some investment in training or maintenance, yet the overall cost is generally lower than the closed source software. For example, the cost of the closed source operating system Windows 7 starts from over $100 while Ubuntu, an open source alternative, is free of cost (Cybersource, 2004). Conclusion Operating system is rather complex software. While considering the above facts, the first and foremost advantage open source software model has over the closed source model is the availability of source code. Owing to this feature alone, any bug detected can be removed rapidly, customizations and interface translations can be done, the freedom of installing the desired level of security can be ensured. Furthermore, the strength of an operating system developed through the open source development model is through the collaboration of the developers worldwide. As the source code gets to be passed around amongst a huge community of developers, it is thoroughly tested and in case of any bugs found by any developer, it is modified and instantly shared. Mostly the open source software is free while owing to the worldwide community, its support is available round the clock, free of cost. Trust is an important part of security (Miller, 2004). The hardware vendors prefer employing the open source software rather than the closed one, owing to the available freedom of debugging and surety that any identified problem will be fixed. With commercial software no such guarantee is provided. The number of worms and viruses reported for Linux are non-existent in comparison to those of Windows (Raggi et al., 2011). Thus, in light of the above listed facts, it can justly be concluded that open source is better as a software development model than closed source software to create a trusted secure operating system. References Cybersource Pty. Ltd. (2004). Linux vs. Windows TCO comparison. Miller, J. (2004). Closed source hardware. Retrieved from http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/281 Raggi, E., Thomas, K., & Vugt, S.V. (2011). Beginning Ubuntu Linux: Natty Narwhal Edition (p. 147). Apress. Raymond, E.S. (2000). The cathedral and the bazaar. Retrieved from http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/cathedral-bazaar/ Richard, M. (2006). Education on open-source vs. closed source. Retrieved from http://cetpa.net/dbfiles/168-1154643657.pdf Read More