China's Red Flag Linux to step onto global stage

InfoWorld ^ | September 04, 2003 | By Sumner Lemon, IDG News Service

[Paleo Conservative]

China's Red Flag Linux to step onto global stage

Alliance with HP strengthened as prelude to worldwide expansion of development effort

TAIPEI, Taiwan -- An alliance between Hewlett-Packard Co. and Chinese Linux developer Red Flag Software Co. Ltd. established last month should lead to cooperation between the two companies on technology development and marketing of Red Flag Linux to companies in China and around the world.

The announcement, made in Beijing on Aug. 20, strengthens a long-standing relationship between the two companies and represents a milestone in Red Flag's plans to expand its business outside the world's most populous country.

The two companies plan to first focus their cooperative efforts in China, and then expand their work to include Asia-Pacific and the rest of the world, according to a joint statement released last month by the two companies. No timeframe was given for when Red Flag plans to expand its enterprise software business beyond China.

[shadowman99]

You know, I've been giving a lot of thought to this whole thing we call the "English" language. You see, English and it's derivatives (such as Ebonics) are allowed to be shared free of charge. Anyone can learn and speak English. The damn liberals even teach it in college! Can you imagine?!?

This means our enemies can read books written in English. Books that our government writes are in English! Do you see where this is going?

TV shows are in English. Newspapers are in English. Song lyrics, written in English, air unencrypted on the radio AS WE SPEAK. Damn it man!!! Something must be done!!!

And you've inspired me! Really, my hat's off to you. You've shown me the way.

The only safe language is one that is owned and controlled by a convicted monopoly. So I suggest that we find an ethically challenged company and create a new language for exclusive use in the US. We could call it Foo. Or Wombat. Whatever. For the sake of demonstration let's say Microsoft owns the new Foo language.

Instead of the common unwashed being able to study Foo and potentially share this knowledge with others, Foo would only be understood by Microsoft. You would need to pay MS to interpret anything written in Foo. You would need to pay for this. A license. And you need to agree to an EULA that you would not publish anything translating Foo into English, the dirty free language of communists and of our enemies.

Books would need to be re-written in Foo. Movies would be spoken in Foo. Songs would only be sung in Foo. This will be rather odd for most of us who only speak English, but fortunately MS will make certain that after paying for the appropriate upgrade each year and by downloading the needed patches to guard against Foo exploits we will be able to function within this new normal. And it will confound our enemies. At least until such a time that MS shares code with them and licenses Foo, but let's not think about that.

Foo will be good for the economy! Or at least for Microsoft - but hey, what the diff? That whole open language English - there was no money in it!

[Golden Eagle]

A shallow argument, comparing modern miracles of technology like state of the art operating systems to a language that is centuries old.

Similar to those we see saying modern day operating systems are no more advanced than the wheel, or nail and hammer. Just tools, they say.

Wrong. Software is incremented and modified constantly. It is an incredibly dynamic medium, that is unique in countless ways between thoughts that become transcribed.

Modern day software is no more equal to centuries-old tools and languages than there was a chance that men from the middle ages could have landed a spacecraft on the moon.

[Bush2000]

Lay off the crack.

How can he: You used it all...

Security through obscurity never works, and I can give you five reasons right now.

Neither does security through openness. Your code ain't any more secure. The only thing that you guys can possibly boast about is faster turnaround time. But that doesn't make you safer.

[Salo]

The fact that the product lends itself to exploitation is very important.

Hackers are the ones to blame for computer attacks, no one else. And just recently Eric Raymond admitted some Linux people had recently launched denial of service attacks. Pretty obvious who is to blame in such incidents.

[Salo]

The one thing I *really* respect about you is your honesty in this matter. There is no inherent security by having closed source. Period. Open source's peer review does not mean the products are more secure. Period. You have to work your ass off to make sure your networks are secure, and if you don't know what you are doing, it does not matter what OSes you use. If you are a moron, you won't be any more secure using linux than you will using Windows. Period. If you are competent, you can secure Windows, linux, unix, Netware, ect..

It is HORRIBLE that China has access to *any* high tech, be it linux or Windows. Period. I think on *this* point, we *all* agree. I don't even want the Communist bastards to have electrcity or running water, but they do. We have to destroy their evil, Marxist system with a good dose of Freedom and democracy. We will. America will prevail. We always have, we always will: we are the hope of the world, and it does not matter what our enemies have or do. Period.

[Bush2000]

The one thing I *really* respect about you is your honesty in this matter.

Thanks, Salo. I mean that. Really.

There is no inherent security by having closed source. Period. Open source's peer review does not mean the products are more secure. Period. You have to work your ass off to make sure your networks are secure, and if you don't know what you are doing, it does not matter what OSes you use. If you are a moron, you won't be any more secure using linux than you will using Windows. Period. If you are competent, you can secure Windows, linux, unix, Netware, ect..

Agree on all points.

It is HORRIBLE that China has access to *any* high tech, be it linux or Windows. Period. I think on *this* point, we *all* agree. I don't even want the Communist bastards to have electrcity or running water, but they do. We have to destroy their evil, Marxist system with a good dose of Freedom and democracy. We will. America will prevail. We always have, we always will: we are the hope of the world, and it does not matter what our enemies have or do. Period.

I don't want the ChiComs to have Windows or Linux. I think about those brave students getting rolled over by tanks -- and that smug bastard premier of theirs yucking it up with Clinton. Makes me want to puke. This is one of the things that annoys me about Linux. I don't think it's right that people are helping out the ChiComs build out their computing infrastructure. This is wrong.

[Golden Eagle]

It is HORRIBLE that China has access to *any* high tech, be it linux or Windows. Period. I think on *this* point, we *all* agree. I don't even want the Communist bastards to have electrcity or running water, but they do.

You commments sound as if they were written by me. If you really mean that, then Linux should be on your hit list just as it is mine. It is the official operating system of their government, and it will be stronger because of this deal. Their success is tied to it's success, more and more every day. Join us standing up for US intellectual property, and against those that may one day use it against us. We can trade with them, but this is certainly not in our interest.

[adam_az]

It happens all the time. The US Government is deeply involved in M$ code, and builds unique versions of Windows for things like running Aircraft Carriers:

http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/july13/cov2.htm

The Navy’s Smart Ship technology may not be as smart as the service contends.

Although PCs have reduced workloads for sailors aboard the Aegis missile cruiser USS Yorktown, software glitches resulted in system failures and crippled ship operations, according to Navy officials.

Navy brass have called the Yorktown Smart Ship pilot a success in reducing manpower, maintenance and costs. The Navy began running shipboard applications under Microsoft Windows NT so that fewer sailors would be needed to control key ship functions.

But the Navy last fall learned a difficult lesson about automation: The very information technology on which the ships depend also makes them vulnerable. The Yorktown last September suffered a systems failure when bad data was fed into its computers during maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Va.

The ship had to be towed into the Naval base at Norfolk, Va., because a database overflow caused its propulsion system to fail, according to Anthony DiGiorgio, a civilian engineer with the Atlantic Fleet Technical Support Center in Norfolk.

[Dominic Harr]

It is HORRIBLE that China has access to *any* high tech, be it linux or Windows.

Y'know, I just don't agree with ya'll here.

I think I really have no problem with China trying to make a competing OS distro. More power to 'em. It'll fail. It's a government project. And in a bloated, inefficient command economy. And they might help us learn some things in the process.

"Chinese Operating System" sounds to me like "French Auto Maker".

What the hell scares you so much about that?

I'll bet you anything the Chinese build will be cracked by American high-school kids before it hits wide release.

I also don't agree with you that it's bad to sell them Windows.

It's probably very much in our national interests to get the Chinese to run Windows.

If you know what I mean. :-D

[CodeMonkey]

Got any other reasons why the US government should rely on code managed by a foreigner instead?

Because it can fork Linux for its own internal releases and not have to release the source code. It is entirely possible for the government to wait until Linux 2.6, fork that and build a custom OS based on Linux for its own internal uses.

I personally would rather the government choose quality over nationality. I want the military to run on only the best of everything. In the military's trade anything going wrong not only gets people maimed or killed, it exposes the populus of the US to the same. I'd rather the US Government worked with QNX to build a modified QNX for our aircraft carriers than the gov't use WindowsNT. QNX is infinitely more reliable than NT. Of course the ideal situation is that they keep writing custom OSs for their weapon systems as they have in the past.

The continuation of the constitutional order and our existance as a free republic are what matter to me. Corporate America be damned if we have to choose between doing what is needed to keep us free and what is needed to keep us rich. As I said, the military should run on only the best. Whether Americans were the sole beneficiaries of the contracts should never be a consideration. While it is better to build the vast majority of our systems here, sometimes using foreigners is the only good option. Does it ever occur to you that many foreigners are professionals and won't screw us over? Did it ever occur to you that people like Torvalds probably do see the US as superior to hellholes like North Korea and China? You'd be wise to rethink your, what seems to be, quasi-phobia of foreigners.

And I have news for you, sometimes our biggest threats on technology are American! Remember the Rosenbergs?

[CodeMonkey]

Yes, there was always the BSD choice. ;-).

The only reason that you and Coral Snake seem to oppose the GPL and Linux is that you cannot take others' code and use it in your product without giving something back. Where I come from, that's called wanting something for nothing....

[Golden Eagle]

No systems are failproof, although a link from 1998 is pretty ancient at this point. In any event I guess this means you are endorsing HP and Red China in their new project.

[Golden Eagle]

"Chinese Operating System" sounds to me like "French Auto Maker". What the hell scares you so much about that?

Simple, despite your willingness to support those that strategically obstruct us: computers are used to build better bombs, and to navigate them towards their target.

I also don't agree with you that it's bad to sell them Windows.

I never said that. I think it is best for us if they run Windows or Unix, proprietary software that they have to pay for as well as have to come to us for support.

[Golden Eagle]

Got any other reasons why the US government should rely on code managed by a foreigner instead?

Because it can fork Linux for its own internal releases and not have to release the source code.

A paltry reason indeed.

I personally would rather the government choose quality over nationality.

So when the Soviets started building better planes/subs we should have started investing in their programs and buying their technology instead, huh. Great way to defend your country, let me tell you.

And I have news for you, sometimes our biggest threats on technology are American! Remember the Rosenbergs?

Absolutely. Why do you think I am so critical of IBM and now HP. They are giving our technology away for peanuts, only this time many of you support them. We should all just go find the largest flower field, hold hands and share everything with them I guess.

[Golden Eagle]

Where I come from, that's called wanting something for nothing....

Exactly what the Chinese want, our technology given to them. But you support that for some reason. Looks to me like you're willing to let anything go anywhere so long as you get yours for free too.

[Golden Eagle]

Something you may be interested in...

[chilepepper]

Good One!

I think what folks miss is that Linux, for the PRC, is a sociological trojan horse... If "Red Flag" Linux is Open Source, it will have to compete with RedHat (or other) Linuxi in being, you guessed it, open. Having a government controlled Linux which was originally based on Open Source would be folly and end up being obsolete -- the Chinese people will, mark my words, eschew "Red Flag" for "Red Hat", in droves, and incorporate or copy whatever value added shows up in "Red Flag".

The reason Linux is a trojan horse is that Linux is the essence of decentralisation (controlled chaos to the cynics), just like the internet... there is no central authority running things, it is freedom and sharing and individuality in one of its most successful expressions.

In this case, Microsoft would have been a much better ideological match for the PRC Government -- they could use the digital rights management layer to impose POLITICAL control on the computer, whereas Microsoft with DRM will try to impose ECONOMIC control over the computer.

Just wait until each and every file is locked and encrypted so only the DRM layer can unlock it. This is coming soon with Microsoft Office. In the usual Microsoft doublespeak, this is to make things "more secure". More secure for Microsoft stockholders of course since it will force everyone to buy the latest version of MS Office...

[TechJunkYard]

Your code ain't any more secure. The only thing that you guys can possibly boast about is faster turnaround time. But that doesn't make you safer.

Two words: e-mail virus

Get rid of that nagging susceptibility, then we can compare unchecked buffers. But you know there is no point to these exchanges while your boxes can be trashed, and subnets brought to their knees, by a dumb user.

[Golden Eagle]

the Chinese people will, mark my words, eschew "Red Flag" for "Red Hat", in droves, and incorporate or copy whatever value added shows up in "Red Flag".

Highly doubtful, since the Red Chinese aren't revealing their source per GPL requirement. So basically you are only helping them build their own proprietary software. Congratulations!

[Golden Eagle]

your boxes can be trashed, and subnets brought to their knees, by a dumb user.

All systems, including Linux, are vulnerable to dumb users opening executable attachments. And the creators of malicious logic are always 99% responsible for the damage their attacks unleash, not users or O/S vendors.