[Edit: they seem to truly love OSS. See child comments. Sorry for my erroneous judgement. It reminded too much of anti-opensource FUD, I'm probably having PTSD of that time...]
I fixed my sentence.
I still think that these professors, either genuinely or by lack of willingness, do not understand the mechanism by which free software warrants its greater quality compared to proprietary ones (which is a fact).
They just remind me the good old days of FUD against open source by Microsoft and its minions...
> In the past several years, we devote most of our time to improving the Linux kernel, and
we have found and fixed more than one thousand kernel bugs; the extensive bug finding and fixing
experience also allowed us to observe issues with the patching process and motivated us to improve it. Thus, we consider ourselves security researchers as well as OSS contributors. We respect OSS volunteers and honor their efforts.
My analysis of that exact same quote was that it was insincere cover to allow them to continue operating an anti-OSS agenda which was made clear in the paper itself.
I fixed my sentence.
I still think that these professors, either genuinely or by lack of willingness, do not understand the mechanism by which free software warrants its greater quality compared to proprietary ones (which is a fact).
They just remind me the good old days of FUD against open source by Microsoft and its minions...