Posted on 05/31/2002 3:15:28 PM PDT by Bush2000
A conservative U.S. think tank suggests in an upcoming report that open-source software is inherently less secure than proprietary software, and warns governments against relying on it for national security.
The white paper, Opening the Open Source Debate, from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (ADTI) will suggest that open source opens the gates to hackers and terrorists.
"Terrorists trying to hack or disrupt U.S. computer networks might find it easier if the federal government attempts to switch to 'open source' as some groups propose," ADTI said in a statement released ahead of the report.
Open-source software is freely available for distribution and modification, as long as the modified software is itself available under open-source terms. The Linux operating system is the best-known example of open source, having become popular in the Web server market because of its stability and low cost.
Many researchers have also suggested that since a large community contributes to and scrutinizes open-source code, security holes are less likely to occur than in proprietary software, and can be caught and fixed more quickly.
The ADTI white paper, to be released next week, will take the opposite line, outlining "how open source might facilitate efforts to disrupt or sabotage electronic commerce, air traffic control or even sensitive surveillance systems," the institute said.
"Computer systems are the backbone to U.S. national security," said ADTI Chairman Gregory Fossedal. "Before the Pentagon and other federal agencies make uninformed decisions to alter the very foundation of computer security, they should study the potential consequences carefully."
Nice attempt at disinfomration, Harr. I guess you have to have the practice with your anti-Microsoft propaganda. I'll match my bona fids to yours anyday.
Microsoft securities will be worth MUCH less as Open Source software eats away at its monopoly...
When I took a SANS course,they brought up the *best practices* way of developing an security software: PUBLISH THE ALGORITHM and take on all comers, often with a monetary prize to whoever breaks the algorithm. Letting peers ALL OVER THE WORLD see the code has TWO effects:
(1) Those who write the code are MORE CAREFUL because they know their PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION is on the line for everyone to see
(2) Their peers will ACTUALLY FIND THEIR MISTAKES.
As a direct example of why the technique of security through obscurity (Microsoft's way of doing things) DOES NOT WORK, the SANS Institute instructor (Eric Cole) pointed out the debacle with the DVD encryption done by Hollywood (by a closed group which let no one else see their work). The DVD encryption was broken almost immediately...
Yep, I knew it. A SANS Institute instructor is the world's expert on security. That's why the DoD uses him to help them publish our national security infrastructure. Not!
Peer review is one thing; publishing your system's specifications is another. Remember, when you publish your system's source code, if your peers do not find all the holes, your enemy will.
Obviously not! We should always look to an MCSE for advice on cryptanalysis! </SARCASM>
I'd even take advice from an MCSE before this group.
Ah, yes, any criticism of MS or your skills is "propaganda". And any critics of MS are 'bigots'.
*Yawn*.
You're a salesman, and you have several times now claimed things I know for certain to be untrue. Which is, I suppose, about the only chance you have of selling MS solutions . . . fraud is the only tactic left, now that coercion has been taken off the table!
Harr, you are so full of slander against Microsoft and anyone who uses them that as an attorney for them, I'd recommend a nice lawsuit so you have to put up or shut up. You have made more remarks about how Microsoft products and technologies do not work, always fail, yadda, yadda, and, yet, you make claims that you want to use them. I'd say, considering your serious bias against Microsoft, that you are not employed by CSC, but by Sun. I work for Ciber, and, as I said, I'd match my bona fids against yours, any day.
Sure, Harr. $40+ billion in revenue and Microsoft products and technologies are sold only to those it can coerce or defraud. Harr, you are scared that .NET will uproot Java. Scared that Oracle will no longer dominate in the Enterprise. You hate to have to compete, and Microsoft is giveing your sector of the industry serious competition. I know you don't think so, but keep thinking that. You guys at Sun need a good nap, you're a cranky bunch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.