Paper detail

The Impact of a Major Security Event on an Open Source Project: The Case of OpenSSL

Context: The Heartbleed vulnerability brought OpenSSL to international attention in 2014. The almost moribund project was a key security component in public web servers and over a billion mobile devices. This vulnerability led to new investments in OpenSSL. Objective: The goal of this study is to determine how the Heartbleed vulnerability changed the software evolution of OpenSSL. We study changes in vulnerabilities, code quality, project activity, and software engineering practices. Method: We use a mixed methods approach, collecting multiple types of quantitative data and qualitative data from web sites and an interview with a developer who worked on post-Heartbleed changes. We use regression discontinuity analysis to determine changes in levels and slopes of code and project activity metrics resulting from Heartbleed. Results: The OpenSSL project made tremendous improvements to code quality and security after Heartbleed. By the end of 2016, the number of commits per month had tripled, 91 vulnerabilities were found and fixed, code complexity decreased significantly, and OpenSSL obtained a CII best practices badge, certifying its use of good open source development practices. Conclusions: The OpenSSL project provides a model of how an open source project can adapt and improve after a security event. The evolution of OpenSSL shows that the number of known vulnerabilities is not a useful indicator of project security. A small number of vulnerabilities may simply indicate that a project does not expend much effort to finding vulnerabilities. This study suggests that project activity and CII badge best practices may be better indicators of code quality and security than vulnerability counts.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.