<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Which Tastes Better for Security, Java or .NET?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.veracode.com/blog/2010/06/which-tastes-better-for-security-java-or-net/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.veracode.com/blog/2010/06/which-tastes-better-for-security-java-or-net/</link>
	<description>Application security testing, analysis, and metrics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 22:16:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: OscarZ</title>
		<link>http://www.veracode.com/blog/2010/06/which-tastes-better-for-security-java-or-net/comment-page-1/#comment-4015</link>
		<dc:creator>OscarZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=1252#comment-4015</guid>
		<description>Well, it is impossible to have the same testing standards. So, how can the two really be considered &quot;the same&quot;. Two different things being tested, two different - very different - criteria. Even if there are a lot of similarities.

In any sort of statistical sampling you also have to consider certain percentage points of error, as well. I see these two conclusions as being &quot;equal&quot;, as it is an inexact science. Equal in the very inexact context of the tests.

Inexact, could be as much as 30% off considering the &quot;unknown&quot; which may be missing and a wide variety of factors. 70% accuracy, however, is generally considered, &quot;Worth a gamble&quot;. What I see as &quot;worth a gamble&quot; - security wise - here... is either platform.

That is, non-conclusive. I feel comfortable with either environment in terms of security. It is all of the other factors I therefore tend to pay attention to. Not so if one compares PHP or C code against these languages.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, it is impossible to have the same testing standards. So, how can the two really be considered &#8220;the same&#8221;. Two different things being tested, two different &#8211; very different &#8211; criteria. Even if there are a lot of similarities.</p>
<p>In any sort of statistical sampling you also have to consider certain percentage points of error, as well. I see these two conclusions as being &#8220;equal&#8221;, as it is an inexact science. Equal in the very inexact context of the tests.</p>
<p>Inexact, could be as much as 30% off considering the &#8220;unknown&#8221; which may be missing and a wide variety of factors. 70% accuracy, however, is generally considered, &#8220;Worth a gamble&#8221;. What I see as &#8220;worth a gamble&#8221; &#8211; security wise &#8211; here&#8230; is either platform.</p>
<p>That is, non-conclusive. I feel comfortable with either environment in terms of security. It is all of the other factors I therefore tend to pay attention to. Not so if one compares PHP or C code against these languages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://www.veracode.com/blog/2010/06/which-tastes-better-for-security-java-or-net/comment-page-1/#comment-3534</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 20:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=1252#comment-3534</guid>
		<description>I think .NET is much better from one perspective: designed at a later date and actively maintained. Given that it was designed around the time of MSFT&#039;s dark night of the soul, they had some impetus to get the implementation right. Java came from the overflow-less era of 1995.

Also, Java doesn&#039;t seem to be as actively maintained. I have a hard time seeing Oracle adding ASLR to the JVM or hardening it. Adobe Flash and MSFT&#039;s CLR are active targets of exploitation and those companies seem to be making an effort to improve their platforms&#039; robustness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think .NET is much better from one perspective: designed at a later date and actively maintained. Given that it was designed around the time of MSFT&#8217;s dark night of the soul, they had some impetus to get the implementation right. Java came from the overflow-less era of 1995.</p>
<p>Also, Java doesn&#8217;t seem to be as actively maintained. I have a hard time seeing Oracle adding ASLR to the JVM or hardening it. Adobe Flash and MSFT&#8217;s CLR are active targets of exploitation and those companies seem to be making an effort to improve their platforms&#8217; robustness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

