Realigning Incentives to Build Better Software: a Holistic Approach to Vendor Accountability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.07766v1
• Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 14:05:24 GMT
• Title: Realigning Incentives to Build Better Software: a Holistic Approach to Vendor Accountability
• Authors: Gergely Biczók, Sasha Romanosky, Mingyan Liu,
• Abstract summary: We argue that the challenge around better quality software is due in no small part to a sequence of misaligned incentives.<n>Lack of liability means software vendors have every incentive to rush low-quality software onto the market.<n>This paper outlines a holistic technical and policy framework we believe is needed to incentivize better and more secure software development.
• Score: 7.627207028377776
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper, we ask the question of why the quality of commercial software, in terms of security and safety, does not measure up to that of other (durable) consumer goods we have come to expect. We examine this question through the lens of incentives. We argue that the challenge around better quality software is due in no small part to a sequence of misaligned incentives, the most critical of which being that the harm caused by software problems is by and large shouldered by consumers, not developers. This lack of liability means software vendors have every incentive to rush low-quality software onto the market and no incentive to enhance quality control. Within this context, this paper outlines a holistic technical and policy framework we believe is needed to incentivize better and more secure software development. At the heart of the incentive realignment is the concept of software liability. This framework touches on various components, including legal, technical, and financial, that are needed for software liability to work in practice; some currently exist, some will need to be re-imagined or established. This is primarily a market-driven approach that emphasizes voluntary participation but highlights the role appropriate regulation can play. We connect and contrast this with the EU legal environment and discuss what this framework means for open-source software (OSS) development and emerging AI risks. Moreover, we present a CrowdStrike case study complete with a what-if analysis had our proposed framework been in effect. Our intention is very much to stimulate a robust conversation among both researchers and practitioners.

Related papers

• Toward Neurosymbolic Program Comprehension [46.874490406174644]
  We advocate for a Neurosymbolic research direction that combines the strengths of existing DL techniques with traditional symbolic methods. We present preliminary results for our envisioned approach, aimed at establishing the first Neurosymbolic Program framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T20:38:58Z)
• Continuous risk assessment in secure DevOps [0.24475591916185502]
  We argue how secure DevOps could profit from engaging with risk related activities within organisations. We focus on combining Risk Assessment (RA), particularly Threat Modelling (TM) and apply security considerations early in the software life-cycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-05T10:42:27Z)
• Balancing Innovation and Ethics in AI-Driven Software Development [0.0]
  This paper critically examines the ethical implications of integrating AI tools like GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT into the software development process. It explores issues such as code ownership, bias, accountability, privacy, and the potential impact on the job market.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-10T14:11:22Z)
• Agent-Driven Automatic Software Improvement [55.2480439325792]
  This research proposal aims to explore innovative solutions by focusing on the deployment of agents powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) The iterative nature of agents, which allows for continuous learning and adaptation, can help surpass common challenges in code generation. We aim to use the iterative feedback in these systems to further fine-tune the LLMs underlying the agents, becoming better aligned to the task of automated software improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:45:22Z)
• An Industry Interview Study of Software Signing for Supply Chain Security [5.433194344896805]
  We study the challenges that affect the effective implementation of software signing in practice.<n>We highlight the different challenges-technical, organizational, and human-that hamper software signing implementation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-12T13:30:53Z)
• Position: How Regulation Will Change Software Security Research [3.8165295526908243]
  We argue that software engineering research needs to provide better tools and support that helps industry comply with the new standards. We argue for a stronger cooperation between legal scholars and computer scientists.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T15:16:44Z)
• A Safe Harbor for AI Evaluation and Red Teaming [124.89885800509505]
  Some researchers fear that conducting such research or releasing their findings will result in account suspensions or legal reprisal. We propose that major AI developers commit to providing a legal and technical safe harbor. We believe these commitments are a necessary step towards more inclusive and unimpeded community efforts to tackle the risks of generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T20:55:08Z)
• Incentivizing Secure Software Development: The Role of Liability (Waiver) and Audit [13.971996404435172]
  Recently proposed U.S. National Cybersecurity Strategy shifts responsibility for cyber incidents back to software vendors. In doing so, the strategy also puts forward the concept of the liability waiver. We show that the optimal strategy for an opt-in vendor is to never quit; and exert cumulative investments in either "one-and-done" or "incremental" manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T16:27:30Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Embedded Software Development with Digital Twins: Specific Requirements for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises [55.57032418885258]
  Digital twins have the potential for cost-effective software development and maintenance strategies. We interviewed SMEs about their current development processes. First results show that real-time requirements prevent, to date, a Software-in-the-Loop development approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-17T08:56:36Z)
• ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development [84.90400377131962]
  ChatDev is a chat-powered software development framework in which specialized agents are guided in what to communicate. These agents actively contribute to the design, coding, and testing phases through unified language-based communication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-16T02:11:34Z)
• Empowered and Embedded: Ethics and Agile Processes [60.63670249088117]
  We argue that ethical considerations need to be embedded into the (agile) software development process. We put emphasis on the possibility to implement ethical deliberations in already existing and well established agile software development processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-15T11:14:03Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.