With all due respect I would say that:
Linux was chosen as the platform for the work because of its growing success and open development environment. Linux provides an excellent opportunity to demonstrate that this functionality can be successful in a mainstream operating system and, at the same time, contribute to the security of a widely used system. A Linux platform also offers an excellent opportunity for this work to receive the widest possible review and perhaps provide the foundation for additional security research by others.
...constitutes if not an endorsement, certian evidence of Linux's legitimacy and utility. No one says that Linux has no flaws or that ndows is the only operating system with flaws. They used Linux because it suited the needs of several of their research projects, was widely available, well know, and as such a good vehicle for distributing their security model -- a model I might add that in theory could be programmed into Windows.
Liberal Classic you are correct, and thank you for so respectfully pointing that out. My normal objection to the NSA Link being used is that the user typically is trying to claim that the NSA version of Linux is 'airtight' secure, which I would imagine you agree that is not the intent of their work.
I will however agree with your point that they have certainly invested into researching it, and are proclaiming that additional research is a positive endeavor, and that's it's nature as a 'souce open' product makes it ideal for classroom type experimentation.
However unfortunately, I am of the belief that publishing the government works publically of an organiztoin such as the NSA in a source open environment exposes much of our government reasearch and processes to potentially confrontational advesaries. They are not entitled to this data. This is actually a leftover of the same policies at the DOE from the Clinton administration, where all doors are flung open for anyone wanting to rob the IP bank.