The column "Is the code open to independent reviewers", how on earth can the open source community continue to claim that their code is safe and secure because of peer review when HeartBleed and a slew of other major security holes and exploits have been found in open source code and has been their for years or even decades?
Just because a million monkeys review your code doesn't make it secure.
Ah spoken like someone who has zero understanding of development.
Ok you have things like heartbleed that took YEARS to find with a lot more eyeballs on it.
Imagine now if that code was closed. Chance are the same bug would STILL be out there and not found so its exploit would still be in use.
A lot of bugs are found/solved by shear dumb luck. Found one yesterday where I work. We knew about the bug but had been banging our head against the wall to find out what caused it as everything in the code looked fine and we struggled replicating it so we were thinking it was a one off. I found it by luck as I was prepping the data to go look at one of the possible causes and boom there it was. It also showed how it was such a frigid cases as it required a lot of things to line up. I just happen to of had stuff from the previous project I worked on that was still in the database. This let me find it in the code.
Open source speeds up the dumb luck finding as you have more eyeballs looking h threw the code. Security issues that heartbleed are found and fixed more by dumbluck than anything else. Open source increases the number of chances you have to find those rare hard to find issues.