<?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: Protecode: Keeping Your Nose Clean, Proactively</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thevirtualcircle.com/2008/05/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thevirtualcircle.com/2008/05/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/</link>
	<description>WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:21:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Should Enterprises Use Mashups? &#124; HaveMacWillBlog (aka Robin Bloor’s Blog)</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualcircle.com/2008/05/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/comment-page-1/#comment-244</link>
		<dc:creator>Should Enterprises Use Mashups? &#124; HaveMacWillBlog (aka Robin Bloor’s Blog)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:56:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/05/01/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/#comment-244</guid>
		<description>[...] In the first situation the downloaded code will (or should) go through all the proper governance procedures, including quality control, eventually emerging with some IT Department &#8220;seal of approval&#8221;. The main worry then is whether you have the legal right to use the code. There&#8217;s no easy way to be sure of this without using an automated capability - from one of the 3 vendors; Black Duck, Protecode or Palamida who operate in this area. There are postings on Black Duck and Protecode. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In the first situation the downloaded code will (or should) go through all the proper governance procedures, including quality control, eventually emerging with some IT Department &#8220;seal of approval&#8221;. The main worry then is whether you have the legal right to use the code. There&#8217;s no easy way to be sure of this without using an automated capability &#8211; from one of the 3 vendors; Black Duck, Protecode or Palamida who operate in this area. There are postings on Black Duck and Protecode. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 10 More Companies to Keep An Eye On &#124; HaveMacWillBlog (aka Robin Bloor’s Blog)</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualcircle.com/2008/05/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/comment-page-1/#comment-243</link>
		<dc:creator>10 More Companies to Keep An Eye On &#124; HaveMacWillBlog (aka Robin Bloor’s Blog)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/05/01/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/#comment-243</guid>
		<description>[...] 7. Protecode: Protecode had a fairly obvious idea, but like a lot of good ideas, it&#8217;s obvious only in retrospect. The time to check whether you&#8217;re likely to violate a software license is when you&#8217;re including someone else&#8217;s code in code you&#8217;re writing - not after it&#8217;s written. You really don&#8217;t want to suddenly discover you need to rewrite bits of a program because you violated someone&#8217;s GPL. For more on this see  Protecode: Keeping Your Nose Clean, Proactively [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 7. Protecode: Protecode had a fairly obvious idea, but like a lot of good ideas, it&#8217;s obvious only in retrospect. The time to check whether you&#8217;re likely to violate a software license is when you&#8217;re including someone else&#8217;s code in code you&#8217;re writing &#8211; not after it&#8217;s written. You really don&#8217;t want to suddenly discover you need to rewrite bits of a program because you violated someone&#8217;s GPL. For more on this see  Protecode: Keeping Your Nose Clean, Proactively [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mbleasdale</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualcircle.com/2008/05/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/comment-page-1/#comment-242</link>
		<dc:creator>mbleasdale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 16:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/05/01/protecode-keeping-your-nose-clean-proactively/#comment-242</guid>
		<description>Thanks so much for the mention in your blog. I&#039;d like to provide some clarification though for your readers. Palamida&#039;s focus since late 2007 has been application security for open source code. While we do still detect possible IP violations, this falls under a much larger umbrella of application security. Ensuring that developers, engineering and security teams can vet their code pre-deployment against business, legal and vulnerability risks. With the largest database of open source and third party components in the industry - including open source projects no longer in current use but still in existence within mission critical apps - Palamida helps eliminate undocumented code.

Last year, Palamida reviewed over 500 million lines of code, of which, over 50% was undocumented within the organizations we assisted. Of THAT, a very significant percentage contained vulnerabilities.

In today&#039;s security and compliance-centric climate, it&#039;s important that organizations fold open source app sec into their processes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks so much for the mention in your blog. I&#8217;d like to provide some clarification though for your readers. Palamida&#8217;s focus since late 2007 has been application security for open source code. While we do still detect possible IP violations, this falls under a much larger umbrella of application security. Ensuring that developers, engineering and security teams can vet their code pre-deployment against business, legal and vulnerability risks. With the largest database of open source and third party components in the industry &#8211; including open source projects no longer in current use but still in existence within mission critical apps &#8211; Palamida helps eliminate undocumented code.</p>
<p>Last year, Palamida reviewed over 500 million lines of code, of which, over 50% was undocumented within the organizations we assisted. Of THAT, a very significant percentage contained vulnerabilities.</p>
<p>In today&#8217;s security and compliance-centric climate, it&#8217;s important that organizations fold open source app sec into their processes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.thevirtualcircle.com @ 2012-02-09 03:37:09 -->
