Security audit

[Gili 24]

I understand that you do not wish to open-source your product, but I am reluctant to use it because of the fact it is closed-source, the company is based in India (yes, this matters) and there is no information about the development team.

Have you considered having an independent 3rd-party audit your source-code on a regular basis as a way to gain credibility without open-sourcing your product?

Thanks,
Gili

[Xinamo 3]

On 1. 9. 2016 at 1:29 AM, Gili said:

I understand that you do not wish to open-source your product, but I am reluctant to use it because of the fact it is closed-source, the company is based in India (yes, this matters) and there is no information about the development team.

Have you considered having an independent 3rd-party audit your source-code on a regular basis as a way to gain credibility without open-sourcing your product?

Thanks,
Gili

+1

[Astrolab_Max 8]

I totally agree! That would boost up your reputation!

[My1 8]

would certainly not be bad.

[marct 3]

Agreed!

[stanbarrows 3]

+1

[Ivarson 17]

+1

[Angristan 2]

Totally agree. Make it open source, or do an audit.

[niemalsnever 4]

+1

[Mark 7]

At least an answer please? AFAIK "Security of our data is your utmost priority." We have questions and thoughts, yet there is not even an answer from the maintainers. This itself means a serious security concern.

[Hemant Kumar 57]

Hi @Mark

Thanks for posting your query on our Forums. From a consumer point of view, we do respect your concern about security.

17 hours ago, Mark said:

"Security of our data is your utmost priority."

 Yes. it's true.

On 9/2/2016 at 4:59 AM, Gili said:

Have you considered having an independent 3rd-party audit your source-code on a regular basis as a way to gain credibility without open-sourcing your product?

1

We also thought of getting a third party audit of Enpass but eventually had to drop this idea for some time (so far). All this because Enpass supports so many platforms with a high frequency of updates (all together) and it is not possible for us to get every update audited because every successive update will invalidate the last audit done. Also getting the source code audited is very hefty in terms of time and expense.

I hope that helps answer your question.

[Gili 24]

Hemant,

Thank you for your response.

I don't think anyone is expecting frequent audits. Once a year or every 3 years should be enough. As to the cost... that's the cost of doing business. The primary reason I skipped over this product was because it was both close-sourced and unaudited. Otherwise, I would have purchased a copy.

Gili

[Ivarson 17]

On 2016-12-01 at 5:48 PM, Gili said:

Hemant,

Thank you for your response.

I don't think anyone is expecting frequent audits. Once a year or every 3 years should be enough. As to the cost... that's the cost of doing business. The primary reason I skipped over this product was because it was both close-sourced and unaudited. Otherwise, I would have purchased a copy.

Gili

+1

If you choose not to share the source, its sorta up to you to pay some third party to review the code with NDA.

And as Gili said, no one expects reoccuring audits. Its mostly, or at least about customers needing to know that you've implemented cryptography in a acceptable way and of course that there are no additional ways in to a running process of Enpass.

 

Edited December 13, 2016 by Ivarson

[pattomi 0]

+1

[chaoszwerg 0]

+1

[Mark 7]

Hermant,

I didn't say it's not true, just wanted to point that if it is then some response to these topics might help.

Actually I am not that concerned about anyone stealing the credentials to my favourite restaurant's website (I don't keep sensitive data in these programs), but nevertheless I am doing my homework in form of a "security audit". I am no security expert nor have access to the source code, but can still find the obvious things (database, encryption, cloud sync, communication, etc) which might make people a little bit less afraid of your software.

Even then, these days it's quite common that people are afraid of anything when it comes to their privacy. This is something that you should keep in mind when choosing not to do a third-party audit because <insert any reason here>.

[Benqer 1]

+1

[LKo 0]

+1

[gammy 5]

+1

It's funny to hear that ensuring that your cryptographic product is in fact secure is not worth the effort.
Other apps come to mind: Signal, Telegram, Veracrypt.

All cross-platform, all frequently updated, all audited.
Oh, and they're all free.

Edited December 15, 2016 by gammy

[Monk32 2]

+1

[Marius 0]

+1

[Guest]

+1

[SnoFox 1]

+1

[ounos 0]

+1

Any plans to do something about it ?

[kevin.purcell 3]

+1

I would definitely be interested to see you posting the results of, say, a yearly audit of your code.