|
|
| "Is It True the DoD Loves Linux?" |
 |
|
Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:21 PM EST
|
I recently discovered, by chance, that one regular on Groklaw works at the Pentagon. Naturally, I couldn't resist asking if it is true what a Congressional aide told me last month that the Department of Defense loves GNU/Linux. I thought his answer was so encouraging that even though it started as a private email exchange, I asked him if I could print his reply. I know I learned some things I didn't know. For one thing, I learned that the US Navy uses Yellow Dog Linux on Macs. He made a few changes, inserted some urls, and gave me permission to publish, so I hope you enjoy our email interchange. He is speaking as an individual, of course, not in an official capacity, relating his own experience and impressions, as you will note in the disclaimer. [note that the information on the DoD and the supercomputer has been made its own article]
********************************************
I recently sent a link to PJ concerning some new marketing material at SCO's website, but I sent the email via my account at the Pentagon. PJ replied:
holy cow
Just noticed where "work" is. Hope I'm being good.
Are you allowed to tell me: is it true that the DoD loves Linux? Not to publish, just to know.
What follows is a cleaned up version of my response with minor edits, the obligatory disclaimer, and some interesting links to back some of claims. If anyone else out there has been using Linux effectively in DoD, please add your comments to the thread.
DISCLAIMER
This document was prepared as a service to the GROKLAW community. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the Department of Defense nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
The appearance of hyperlinks does not constitute endorsement by the Department of Defense of this Web site or the information, products, or services contained therein. The Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information you may find at these locations.
Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Department of Defense. The opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Department of Defense, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
PJ:
The US Army loves embedded Linux. The "soldier of the future" and battlefield communications will all be created on top of Linux. Embedded solutions can be found in a variety of vehicles for situational awareness and "blue force tracking" (good guys). You need low power chips in such an envirorment, so processors like ARM are very popular. With Linux you have the code, it's secure, it ports very easily to a variety of platforms, and development costs are very, very low. Embedded Linux is a favorite for many communications systems.
The Intelligence Community loves Linux as well. I'm sure you've seen the stories about Secure Linux from the NSA (which was just added to the 2.6 kernel). Just like in the real world, you find it in the back room on the Power User's workstation and on the servers. If you compare the price of Secure Linux on Intel multiprocessor workstations verses Trusted Solaris on Sun HW, you save a boatload of money.
I used Linux on a USAF project during the Kosovo conflict. We pulled the prototype out of my lab and wired a variety of locations throughout Italy with Samba data servers and Perl coded robots that surfed for data and cataloged it directly into MySQL databases. The databases were accessible via apache and PHP. We were credited with helping to save the life of a downed pilot because all the critical information was immediately available to commanders and the Special Ops team in their helicopters doing the extraction. One of the downed pilots was a commander we had met while wiring his intel shop a week before he was shot down. Seeing him back at work 48 hours later is still the best "Thank You" I've ever received for my efforts at work. You can read the unclassified version of the story online. It doesn't call out Linux explicitly, but we used first and second generation Cobalt servers running early versions of RedHat 4.x. You can barely see the server sitting under the laptop in the cover photo.
For now, I am on loan to an Air Force office at the Pentagon, working as a scientist for a variety of special programs. When I came to the USAF in 2001, it was to scale all of the work we did during Kosovo to enterprise systems in Command and Control Centers, and get the data integrated into the cockpit. Everything that started in Linux as a prototype was used in both Afghanistan and Iraq as a fully integrated enterprise solution. The system is mature and battle tested, and it is time for me to move on.
I monitor Groklaw because I use Linux professionally. Any favorable decision for SCO would obviously impact the cost of rolling out new systems and cause significant disruptions of existing mission critical systems. MS lobbies here at the Pentagon, trying to protect existing desktop deals which have to be measured in $billions throughout DoD. Linux is not pervasive yet, but give it some time. Now that it has reached the level of compliance offered by Solaris and HPUX there will be more rollouts.
A typical acquisition program is run by a program manager adverse to taking risks, and Linux is still considered risky by the uneducated. Fast track and
innovative programs are using Linux, which keeps it in a favorable spotlight. I expect to see continued growth, especially with IBM, Novell, and Sun(?) packaging desktop and server combinations.
At home, I am a happy Linux user just like yourself. SCO drives me a bit crazy, so not only does Groklaw keep me informed, it lets me vent on occassion. I think your efforts at building (and leading) a community is one of the internet's treasures. I used pull my hair out trying to explain to senior executives how important community building can be, especially among the intelligence analysts on our secure networks. Building collaborative tools and having someone such as yourself to lead a group of analysts is really the key to success for transforming our "business". I don't think I've ever seen anyone do this as well as you have with Groklaw.
So there is a long answer to your short question. From someone who is on the inside, many programs love Linux. For many others, it is still an illicit affair, but it will soon be an "open" marriage.
BTW, Good Luck with your new job, and Thank You for Groklaw.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:42 AM EST |
Shhh - don't tell SCO... they'll could claim the F-16 is a deriviative work of
System V and demand a cut of the defense budget!
:-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:46 AM EST |
What an uplifting way to start the day :) Thanks PJ for publishing this and to
our friend for writing it. It is nice to know that "we are not alone"
in our pursuit of an Open Source future.
Think I'll go and tell my boss now, if the US DoD are using Linux I'm sure a bog
standard engineering firm can as well :))
Keep up the good work and thanks for this community.
Neil[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Captain on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:49 AM EST |
Blizzard vs. bnetd
Just found this on Slashdot. It's
interesting to see the similarities with regards to copyrights and what is
copyrightable. I couldn't help thinking of SCO's ABI allegations when I read
about interoperability, and also the 'stolen' smileys and the 'de minimis'
arguments. I don't follow this case but if you've ever played on battle.net, you
can figure out what it's about. It's a good read in either case.
Link to document.
Link to /.
story.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: piskozub on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:52 AM EST |
| If SCO is looking for a big Linux end user to sue, they need stop seeking. Let
them simply sue the United States :-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:55 AM EST |
Greetings,
As you may know, we at SCO take our imagined intellectual property very
seriously. It has now come to our attention that this same IP is now being used
by the United States Military establishment without our express consent. We are
a patriotic company and wish to do our part in assisting our government in
keeping the taxes low. So as a special bonus we at SCO will offer the US
government a special rate for use of our IP with a special licensing offer of
24,999.00 per a processor. We know the US government will see the value in
paying for our license rather than going through a needless court conflict.
Sincerely, Darl McBribe[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:13 AM EST |
Isn't one of the top 10 rules of working for a shady .gov:
"Want to publish something work related? Unless you have official
permission, don't. Especially not on the internet."
If you got it, cool. If you didn't, you're a moron. They don't care if it's
all unclassified or not. Also, they don't care whether or not you say you're
speaking for yourself and not for the government.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DK on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:33 AM EST |
| The US Army loves Linux, the US intelligence community loves Linux, the DoD
loves Linux, Wall
Street loves Linux - but I thought that Linux was supposed to be
AntiAmerican and communistic? ;-) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: stend on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 05:08 AM EST |
| I can personally attest, and d
ocument, that Linux use (at least on a small scale) in the DoD dates back to
November 1992. :) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: cacruden on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:57 PM EST |
| I feel much better now, I was worried about the blue screen of death.... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:00 PM EST |
All of you deserve highest praise.
PJ is of course a key to the success and usefulness of Groklaw - but the
community provides the depth and breadth that makes the site INVALUABLE. The
community is the lifeblood of the Open Source movement, and the real engine for
continued success.
Thx[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:12 PM EST |
BTW...
...thank you for your service to our country! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:15 PM EST |
Goodness, you'll never find a better summary than that.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:19 PM EST |
I put 15 years in the Air Force. I started as a crew dog on fighters but spent
the last 5 years in a weather shop as a programmer on mainframes and IBM RS/6000
boxes running AIX I had retrained into computer programming since I had been
writing shareware for many years prior as a hobby. I ended up being more
interested in the administration side of the house and was put in charge of the
RS/6000 cluster. We actually did a lot of work for the pentagon as well and
worked closely with them.
I got interested in Linux almost from it's birth (early '92). I was able to save
our shop a lot of money on expensive diskless workstation and Xterminal hardware
by installing Linux on around 50 PCs for our programmers and analysts. This
allowed us to develop and execute out X based software on the RS/6000 servers
but display them on the Linux PCs. This would have been early '93 and we
continued to use them until I left in '97.
I have since worked for a couple of very well known companies and have and
continue to make extensive use of Linux.
Void[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:20 PM EST |
| TALOSS:
Three-Dimensional Advanced Localization Observation Submarine Software
Reconnaissance,
Surveillance and Target Acquisition Mission Equipment Package (RSTA-MEP) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:43 PM EST |
| Always good to have someone on your side who can answer the question "you and
what army".
People have already made plenty of comments about what a blue
400pound gorilla does to tiny little irritants. Imagining Darls face as he
learns the DoDs response is even more fun.
No of course the army can't send
over a few airborne troops to liberate unix but it still makes for a nice mental
image.
Oh and SELinux is a great thing. NSA supplying opensource code to make
my socialist machines more secure. Shows you the world isn't nearly so black and
white as some would make you believe. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:58 PM EST |
It's often frustrating to endure the endless PR and mindless
"analysis" surrounding this charade and I on occasion have been known
to vent in this forum and elsewhere. I do, however appreciate the time taken
write as you have done. It helps to have a calm assessment of the potential
impacts of any favorable view of SCO's claims. Unencumbered resources such as
Linux, GNU, the BSDS, X and many other free and open source codebases have value
beyond what The SCO Group is claiming. The people who have provided these
treasures to the individuals, corporations and governments of the world merit
respect and the freedom to do as they have chosen with their property,
unmolested by the greed of the unscrupulous and undeserving.
Dan O'Mara[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: k12linux on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:14 PM EST |
Very interesting indeed. Now SCO is ticking off the military. ;)
Seriously though, thank you for the article and the update on Linux in the DoD.
Saying that a Linux systems are "mature and battle tested," takes on
new meaning now.
---
- k12linux[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dentonj on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:17 PM EST |
| http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=2130
I first learned
Linux on this system. I installed it at home just so that I could learn the OS
better and have been using it ever since. The guru who taught me (he was also a
soldier) had learned Linux while working with DARPA several years before that.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:21 PM EST |
| As a former DoD contractor, I used GNAT (free Ada compiler integrated with
GCC)
quite a bit from 1998 -- and it's well recommended to folks still doing
Ada for
the DoD. Of course, that was under Win NT/2000, unfortunately, but
I was able
to move to Linux later on. Target platforms were Linux, WinNT,
vxWorks. I'd
also heard Linux mentioned with relation to various embedded
projects,
including
Land Warrior. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DaveB on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:41 PM EST |
| That's cool! Yeah, go ahead Darl. Take on the DoD. You know any proceeding
involving the federal government goes at the speed of mud moving upstream. Your
grandson will be retired by the time it's over! I was in ESC-
Electronic Security Command, now Air Intelligence Command, but I guess I got out
before Linux was implemented (1988-1992). Well, that or I didn't know what it
was. It looked like DOS to me. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:00 PM EST |
"Defense Department buys Linux cluster"
http://www.wtonline.com/news/1_1/daily_news/22781-1.html[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:08 PM EST |
A slight nitpick: the ICI IDM mentioned in the article does not run Linux.
Despite the confusing name, LynuxWorks sells an OS called LynxOS which is most
definately not Linux. A Unix-like OS to be sure, with several of its own
quirks, but not Linux.
The author is not the only knowledgeable person to suffer from the confusion;
indeed, that same confusion lead to my LynxOS experience at work.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gdeinsta on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:20 PM EST |
Some people left postings expressing concern after this article appeared last
night and then was removed. Just so you know (since PJ didn't say anything), I
read it when it went up the first time last night and the only change I see from
the first time it was posted is the addition of the boilerplate disclaimer at
the top. Evidently the article was in the shop getting lawyered-up.
--
Gord Deinstadt[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:30 PM EST |
I'm a fed working at a DoD facility. Lots of linux all around the place.
For many of us, Motif (lesstif) support as well as X11 support was critical many
years ago. With the availability of OpenMotif and XFree11 this is no longer a
problem.
MS OS's and apps cause major headaches when it comes to security. Those savy
enough to deply linux were in the most part savy enough to patch their systems
before the advent of the various wu-ftpd, bind, and lpd exploits like ramen.
The biggest problem on the desktop is PowerPoint. Word documents are not too
bad, but PP is a beast. Managers absolutely demand that their PP presentation
work flawlessly. Any "glitch" pisses off the people that spend the
money. OpenOffice as well as other apps do not meet their requirements at this
time.
I would like to deply more MacOS X systems as it meets many of our requirements
(e.g., need X11, Motif, MS Office, Perl, ssh, VPN, Mozilla, Quicktime, gcc,
etc...). However, the paper pusher hates Macs, thinks he understands computer
technology, and doesn't listen to those of us that have to actually implement
his wacko ideas. He tried to put linux on his home computer but screwed up his
system. We could not figure out what he did wrong because his description of
what he did did not match any of our experiences. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yup - Authored by: dentonj on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 11:27 PM EST
- How do they react when... - Authored by: leonbrooks on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 11:29 PM EST
- Yup - Authored by: pscottdv on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:39 AM EST
- Yup - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 08:50 AM EST
- The Navy Loves it Too - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:23 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:44 PM EST |
The "soldier of the future" and battlefield communications will all be
created on top of Linux.
I cannot tell you how much better I sleep
at night knowing that none of them will be created on top of
CE.
( THIS IS NOT A TROLL -- I AM SINCERE -- PLEASE DO NOT FLAME
ME )
-AIB[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:48 PM EST |
A great article! Thank you for posting it. I was especially impressed with
your sentiments about saving the life of a downed pilot. It reminded me of how
a system helped save some lives of our military at another time. This isn't
about a Linux system, but does show how progress in technology can make a huge
difference for the military. I hope you'll indulge me. Here's the story to the
best of my memory.
A few months before Desert Storm the company I worked for (Convex Computer
Corporation) was asked to speed up the delivery of our C240 (a 4 head
vector/parallel mini-supercomputer) to the Joint Electronic Warfare Command to
replace a couple (at least) VAXs. This was such a big deal we kept an identical
system looping diags on the manufacturing floor in case their system showed even
the slightest hiccup. If that happened we'd be able to get a replacement piece
or the whole system to them immediately. JEWC was responsible for analyzing the
electronic data gathered from Iraq in connection with their air defense network.
Prior to installing the C240 the round trip time to get the analysis back to
the field was 22 hours. With the C240 it was about 2 hours, tops.
A few months after the Gulf War ended an officer supplied a briefing of just how
effective the air war was and how much of a difference that C240 made in helping
with that air campaign, and with helping to preserve the lives of our pilots.
It's a fantastic feeling to know that you're a part of an organization that can
make that kind of a difference. And I'm glad to know Linux is being used in the
same way.
Regards,
An Ex-Con(vex)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:49 PM EST |
You know, the first time, I saw DoD I was thinking Drink or Die, and not
Department of Defence. When it all didn't make sense, I really had to think
about it a little more.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:51 PM EST |
I work on the Navy and Marine Corps Intranet Secret and unclass sides. We have
Linux Kernels running in our Symetrics cabinets. That's 'bout all I can say.
Over and out[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Thomas Frayne on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:58 AM EST |
This evening I found on Yahoo Finance a discussion about whether the Apache ASL
2.0 license is compatible with the GPL. See Problems with the GPL.
Here are my thoughts related to
that discussion.
FSF does not disagree with Apache on principle. They
just say that GPL 2.0 is incompatible with the ASL 2.0. I agree with FSF's view
of the current license terms, but hope that Apache's position will
prevail.
Assuming that Apache contains some programs derived from or
linked to GPL'd programs in Linux, a distribution of Linux + Apache is a
compilation that requires the permission of all the copyright owners for legal
distribution, according to copyright law. Further, it is not a mere aggregation
as described by the GPL, so the GPL does not give this permission for a
distributor that does not give recipients the full rights given under the GPL.
A right that is terminated on occurrence of some event is not a full
right, so a Linux + Apache distribution that is Licensed under ASL 2.0 has no
permission from the copyright owners via the GPL. It is possible that the same
argument would apply to Apache when distributed by itself, but I don't know
enough about Apache to say.
Apache says that the ASL is compatible with
the GPL. I think that their argument is that the ASL allows the recipient to
distribute under the GPL, effectively giving full GPL rights to the
recipient.
I think that this discussion is theoretical at this point,
because I think that for any actual effects, Apache would have to sue someone
for using Apache after filing a patent suit, and some owner of GPL'd code used
by Apache would have to sue Apache for breaching the GPL while trying to defend
Free Software. I think it unlikely that a GPL'd copyright owner would sue in
this circumstance.
Apache could solve this, still theoretical, problem,
retail, by getting agreements giving the required permissions from all the GPL'd
copyright owners involved, but a wholesale solution is required.
There
are hints that FSF would like to include language like Apache's in GPL 3.0, but
who knows how long it will take FSF to release version 3? However, perhaps FSF
could release a version 2.1 to address just this problem. Perhaps the problem
could be solved just by provisions such as:
"No permission to copy,
modify, or distribute this program or a derived work, collection, or compilation
based on or containing this program is given by this license. However, anyone
who has received the program under this license is offered the additional
permissions listed in (a) upon agreement with the offer's terms listed in (b).
Evidence of agreement with this offer is by distributing a derived work,
collection, or compilation based on or containing this program that requires
permission under copyright law from one or more of the copyright owners of this
program.
(a) ... in-house copy or modification ... mere aggregation ...
GPL'd as a whole ...
(b) [current terms of the GPL for distribution] and
agreement to license all present and future patents without royalties or other
obligations to everyone for use in programs licensed by one of the following
licenses: GPL, LGPL, kernel-GPL, ... This agreement may be voluntarily
terminated in writing by the distributor, and is automatically terminated if
breached by the distributor but the patents already licensed on termination
remain licensed on the same terms. Note that breaching this agreement also
forfeits all rights under the license, so the distributor must follow the
requirements of copyright law applying to terminated licenses. The distributor
and the program owner agree that after termination of this agreement no future
patents are affected by this agreement, and the permissions of the copyright
owners are withdrawn. ... [Provisions for one subsidiary holding patents and
another distributing the program] ...
Clearly, it might take months for
FSF to flesh out this suggestion, but it still might be much faster to do than
to produce version 3.0. There might be worse pitfalls than the one I just
hinted at, so FSF would have to do 2.1 as carefully as it did 2.0, and there
would still be some risk.
Still, I think the risks of doing this are
much less than the risks of not doing it. Microsoft might be willing to
sacrifice Apache on Windows to file patent suits for use of programs licensed by
the GPL, but is less likely to be willing to sacrifice all rights to use any
GPL2.1'd program after all major distributions are licensed under GPL2.1, and
only a few holdouts from individual copyright owners remain with 2.0.
I
have advocated building an open source patent portfolio to provide similar
cross-licensing protection for the Open Source community. I had never thought
of cross licensing copyrights with patents until I saw the ASL
provisions.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:21 AM EST |
So now you can send up a multi million dollar cruise missile to a tent to hit a
camel in its butt, but you have to send it the source code too...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:50 AM EST |
I worked in the Navy as Aircraft Electronics Tech from 1988 to 1996. The main
piece of equipment I worked on was an ASM-123 flight computer. In the SH-3 Sea
Stalion airframe (helo that started to be made in 1958 and was updated over and
over again) it basicly took everything that went on in the aircraft ( this
bearing will fail within 30 hours; voltage from this generator is .005 volts low
(( I remember this value well!! )); wind is comming in from 311 deg. at 4 knots
an hour; you are 11 feet south west of your flight plan; etc.) and put it all
into a display that the piolet could glance at and know right away what was
going on. The SH-60 airframe ( apache ) took this to new heights. as did the
S3d's.
Anyways in order to look busy and dodge work ;) I would sometimes sit at the
bench and scan thru the O.S. code (it was hard wired in to the computer). Every
once in a blue moon we would be able to see some of the coders comments. I
started to use Slackware in 95-96 and would see Linus Torvolds name here and
there and wonder if I knew him from the Navy or something because I rememberd
the name from somewhere :). What I have reconstructed is that the company that
sold the computer to the Navy (teledyne) started with either a *nix or Linux
kernel and heavily modified it. We got updates on a regular basis and I suspect
that much of it was from open source and modified to run on that platform. I'm
not sure how much of this is fact and how much is fiction, but I do know I saw
Linus Torvolds name in that code more than a few times.
Please don't flame me for spelling/grammer errors. I've been up more than 39
hours now, but couldn't resist checking Groklaw before going to bed. ......
Maybe I should sue SCO for creating this mess and causing Groklaw to come into
being and underminig my health. My idea for a law suit isn't much worse wose
thats SCO's idea. :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jcurbo on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:52 AM EST |
As a future communications officer in the USAF (I go to OTS in May), I'm glad to
hear Linux is being used all over the place. Hopefully I can help push things a
little :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 03:13 AM EST |
| Is it me or is this article a really weird case of deja-vu? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 04:50 AM EST |
I am a contractor who does Certifications and Accreditations (formal security
audits) on DoD computer systems. While some projects are moving ahead full
steam on Linux, many others are being converted to MS based operating systems
(including WinCE). One system that I am currently working on is moving from Sun
servers and a Windows based client to an all Windows based system. Other
systems are being pushed to Windows too. Windows systems can be patched in the
field by users, *nix based systems are only updated by the vendor field reps or
when updated systems are fielded.
One of the Program Offices published a draft Secure Configuration Guide for
Linux that was full of FUD and anti-open source/Linux drivel along with many
errors. I and several others spent several days commenting on it and correcting
problems. The final version was much better in tone and facts, but still biased
against Linux.
Mitre has a paper on FOSS in DoD that basically states that it would cost far
too much for DoD to eleminate FOSS, and it's security posture would take an
unacceptable drop. On *nix systems FOSS applications are required to be used
for security.
While other guys in my office are getting more Linux systems to look at, I am
getting more Windows systems. Sun and most other OS's are going away. With the
2.6 kernel there may be a move by organizations that want higher security to use
Linux. While parts of DoD love Linux, others hate it.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: vadim on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 05:54 AM EST |
Take a look:
http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/unix/story/0,10801,90205,00.html?
SKC=news90205
It's seems that mainstream press catching up [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: xtifr on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 07:13 AM EST |
In all of this, I'm suprised that no one has mentioned the DoD's own special
programming language, Ada! Support for Ada is included in the box on almost all
Linux systems. I'm not aware of any other mainstream OSes that can make that
claim. (Well, the BSDs, but that's because they use the same GNU compilers as
Linux.) Surely this DoD-friendly feature contributes to some of the luv the DoD
gives to our favorite OS. :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: phrostie on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 07:13 AM EST |
The ARL has supported a Linux version for many years. infact longer than i have
been using linux.
http://ftp.arl.mil/brlcad/
Irix 6.x
FreeBSD i86
Linux i86
Solaris SPARC
MacOS X
---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/cad-linux[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 08:00 AM EST |
To be honest i don't find the news all positive. I mean
a main purpose of effective military machinery usually is
killing and i am not sure i like it that they use linux
for that (especially because it "works" better).
I guess that many here will have a different viewpoint but
i am not such a big fan of the DoD ... and yes, i do think
that software engineers as well as the engineers of new
atomic bombs do have an ethical responsiblity. It's just
too easy to delegate this to the "politicians" especially
if you know about their politics. Of course, i know that
everyone is free to use linux so there is no chance to
forbid this. But do we have to cheer every user?
And to me, the days where you had to quote big
company/institutions as satisfied users to convince people
that gnu/linux is a good system are somewhat over (although
it doesn't really hurt of course).
Btw, didn't Apple have clauses about forbidding usage at
least in atomic plants? Is this still the case? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 08:03 AM EST |
The Naval Oceanographic Office has been using Linux since version 0.99 (possibly
earlier but this one I have personal knowledge of). How do I know this? Don't
ask ;-) Check out http://www.oss-institute.org/ for info on a Cooperative
Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) between NAVOCEANO and OSSI.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: blacklight on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 08:05 AM EST |
In my opinion, you don't get to appreciate the full flavor as to just how brain
dead Rob Enderle's comments until they are juxtaposed with the feedback from the
armed services/intelligence/military contractor branch of the Open Source
community:
http://www.technewsworld.com/perl/story/32885.html (Can Open Source Survive an
Audit?)
Why do I keep beating up on poor Rob Enderle? Hint: I used to pull the wings and
legs off flies when I was seven. I stopped when I couldn't resist presenting the
result to my beautiful late mother, who then (a) smacked my hand and (b) tanned
my butt.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: phrostie on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:04 AM EST |
SCO seem to have posted bug fixes to some OS projects.
who at this point would accept their code without a letter signed in blood from
a company officier.
OpenLinux update for saned
Secunia, UK - 5 minutes ago
SCO has issued updated packages for sane. These fix several vulnerabilities,
which
can be exploited by malicious people to cause a DoS (Denial of Service). ...
http://secunia.com/advisories/10939/
OpenLinux update for mpg123
Secunia, UK - 20 minutes ago
SCO has issued updated packages for mpg123. These fix some older
vulnerabilities,
which potentially can be exploited by malicious ...
http://secunia.com/advisories/10940/
---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/cad-linux[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT: SCO Updates - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:06 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:09 AM EST |
http://tid-www.nrl.navy.mil/Exhibits/pdfs/Info%20Sheet%20pdfs/Space%20Info%20She
ets/Tacsat.pdf
Embedded linux is used for the payload software on this satellite. How do I
know? I was the lead for the
visible-light camera software.
This is one of many Linux-based projects at NRL. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:32 AM EST |
I worked on the Cyber Warrior Project. First it was VxWorks, we complained that
Embedded Linux was a better idea. Then the word came down that WinCE was the
standard platform. I got paid to convert the VxWorks code to WinCE. Then someone
in the organization ignored orders, convert their stuff to embedded Linux and
requested a head-to-head testing competition. Embedded Linux won hands down,
price, stability, performance, ROM footprint. The next word came down to convert
everything to Embedded Linux.
Why write code once when you can do it three times?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:49 AM EST |
Unknown to a lot of people outside the business a lot of the security types use
Macs. My brother still uses Windows and I tease him about being the "honey
pot" on their network.
I'd love to do more Linux work for the Navy but they're locked into an EDS
contract called NMCI that's all Windows. It's a horrible contract all around.
EDS losing a billion dollars a year besides it costing the taxpayers billions
and the Navy not getting much of anything besides a really slow Email system.
GSA has gotten so many NMCI complaints they stopped taking any new ones. EDS and
the Navy are sinking each other and neither will let go.
That's what happens when the company HQ is in Bush's home state. The taxpayers
take it up the poop deck. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:56 AM EST |
| Sums it all up really.
b3ta
comp
entry [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:57 AM EST |
The National Archives of Canada has been using Linux since Rel 0.90. It's stable
and reliable and "vendor independant", which is important when your
preserving computer records 'forever'.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:57 AM EST |
http://www.vnunet.com/News/1152922
But SCO has been quick to try and play down the newsletter's significance.
Blake Stowell, SCO's director of public relations, told vnunet.com: "An
article by itself in a newsletter does not in one fell swoop change the legal
terms of the licences that are held between a company and its licensees.
"Even after that article appeared, IBM and AT&T made no effort to
change the terms of the licence between the two companies."
---
http://secunia.com/advisories/10940/
OpenLinux update for mpg123
Release Date: 2004-02-20
http://secunia.com/advisories/10939/
OpenLinux update for saned
Release Date: 2004-02-20
http://secunia.com/advisories/10942/
OpenLinux update for fetchmail
Release Date: 2004-02-20
http://secunia.com/advisories/10941/
OpenLinux update for BIND
Release Date: 2004-02-20 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:07 AM EST |
The entirety of response to Defendant's interrogatory number 7 is
misrepresentative of Caldera International (d/b/a/ The SCO Group) as being the
former Santa Cruz Operation. The Plaintiff has no standing to make any statement
within this response.
"I'm a _Botanist_, Jim, not a lawyer!"
Dan O'Mara[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:20 AM EST |
| Everything that started in Linux as a prototype was used in both Afghanistan
and Iraq as a fully integrated enterprise solution. The system is mature and
battle tested...
This mentions that the prototyping was done on Linux,
but leaves open the target platform of the enterprise solution. Was it deployed
on Linux or some other platform? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: pogson on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:31 AM EST |
I clicked to the webpage of the
court and was unable to get any links to work ("404"). I am not sure whether
they are making major changes, having problems, or perhaps updating... but they
have a note that I quote:
We are currently re-evaluating our
website and we would be interested in your input. Please send us an e-mail with
suggestions. Let us know what features of the site you most often visit and any
suggestions you have on improving the accessibility of the site or contents.
E-mail us at: support@utd.uscourts.gov. Thank you. Since GROKLAW
readers are intensely interested in what transpires there, I thought they might
have suggestions. ---
Happiness=RAID1 with multiple 120gB drives [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:33 AM EST |
| Quick, someone tell Didiot and Skiba. SCO has another great monetizing
opportunity!
Intel
promises more speedy Linux releases. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:40 AM EST |
So the bottom line is, the defense capabilities of the U.S. will be negatively
affected if SCO wins their case. Explain that to Grandma and she'll now
understand what you've been ranting and raving about.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:46 AM EST |
All this talk about the military reminded me of the prisoners we've taken
without trial, and Sklyarov.
If Linus isn't a U.S. citizen yet, he doesn't have any civil rights. This makes
me nervous.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:46 AM EST |
I used to work as a contractor at NASA/Johnson Space Center. I was a systems
administrator at a software development laboratory, where a simulation
development environment called "trick" was developed. Trick runs on
various flavors of Unix, including Linux. It was used to develop engineering
(used by engineers to answer, "What is the best way to do this?") and
training (for astronauts) simulations. Some of the systems simulated were the
SRMS (the Space Shuttle robotic arm), the SSRMS the Space Station robotic arm),
and SAFER, an emergency rescue jetpack. There were also various vehicle
simulations running under Linux. See
http://www.titan-aeu.com/trick/project.html#ea, unfortunately most of the links
on that page are behind a JSC firewall, and can't be reached by us mere
mortals.
By the time I left in Oct 2002, most of our hosts were running Linux. Trick and
the simulations themselves were developed using Linux and the sims were used
both on the ground and in orbit (running under Linux on laptops) for training.
On orbit training is necessary because when you have missions lasting several
months, you need to keep your skills sharp.
Of course many of us also ran Linux on our personal desktops, laptops and home
computers as well.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 11:55 AM EST |
| The fight isn't over in Europe, either. Europeans must stay as vigilant as we
are.
Europe's
New IP Law: "You Just Have to Trust Us"
At least some of the law lords
are paying attention.
------ [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: miniver on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:36 PM EST |
- MITRE Report on DoD use of Free and Open Source Software can be
found in PDF. Search for MITRE Free and Open
Source.
- The US Navy Loves Linux - All of the US Navy's
submarines are either (a) using Sonar systems built on top of Linux, or (b)
scheduled to be refit with Sonar systems built on top of Linux. Search for Acoustic Rapid
COTS (Commercial-Off-The-Shelf) Insertion (ARCI).
- DISA loves
Linux - The Defense Information Initiative Common Operating Environment (DII
COE) now supports Red Hat Linux Advanced Server as a certified operating system
(along with Sun Solaris 7, Hewlett-Packard HP-UX 10.20 and [shudder] Microsoft
Windows NT 4.0). Search for DII COE.
(Ob
Disclaimer: I worked briefly on the ARCI program, and introduced Open Source to
the guy who wrote the MITRE report, and lobbied DISA about Linux while I was at
MITRE.) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:48 PM EST |
From HPCWire: "Linux Networx announced that the Department of Defense (DoD)
High Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPCMP), has purchased a
2,132-processor Evolocity II (E2) cluster from Linux Networx for the Army
Research Laboratory Major Shared Resource Center (MSRC). "
http://www.tgc.com/breaking/1621.html
Yes, we love Linux. :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:50 PM EST |
Is Linux being used to do the "fly by wire" (aka "hard
real-time") stuff anywhere in the DoD? I love Linux but using it in those
areas would make me nervous, especially if I was on-board an aircraft with Linux
controlling the flight surfaces, etc...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 01:56 PM EST |
We've been waiting eagerly for a week now! When will her written ruling be
entered (and how quickly will it become available on Groklaw?)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 01:59 PM EST |
Linux Networx is a Canopy Company. In 2000, Canopy invested more than $2
million. Not sure about them now. But, you've got to love the irony of it, isn't
it?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 02:16 PM EST |
Hi. There is another defense contractor (Pratt & Whitney Aircraft) using
Linux to test and control the engine of the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. The
story is at http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20040210S0002[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 05:28 PM EST |
Security Space posts statistics on webserver use by domain. Here is the
report for Jan 04. (For those who want the quick summary, it shows that
Microsoft IIS leads Apache use in .mil sites at a ratio approaching 4 to 1.
It's interesting that .mil is the only domain I could find where MS IIS
leads Apache. .gov does come close, but everywhere else in the world Apache
dominates. This does not speak well of the U.S. government's
judgement.)
Of course, their survey like all survey's should be taken
with a grain of salt. In particular they are surveying only 'important' sites.
None the less, their overall survey tends to track the Netcraft survey, so
they're probably not too far off.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 05:54 PM EST |
| SCO's stock should rise on this news! They stand to gain a $1,595,875 SCO IP
License sale for these 2,132 CPUs (according to SCO.com,
they get the first eight CPUs for $4,999 and each additional CPU for
$1,590,876, only $749 per additional CPU.) As it seems you can't buy
a license without a credit card, I hope the US Government has some room on its
AmericanExpress... And, yes, I'm illustrating absurdity with absurdity. The
government isn't going to pay SCO for a do-nothing, add-no-value extortion
scheme. (If it does, I say we, US Citizens registered to vote, put some people
out of office.) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Chris Cogdon on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:16 PM EST |
I'm pretty sure Linux Networx, the company reported to have sold the linux-based
supercomputer, is one of the companies in the Canopy Group's portfolio?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 11:49 AM EST |
| I am the Information Technology Manager for one of the 14-or-so components of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). I'm responsible for all IT
infrastructure stuff for about 450 users, both government staff and contractors.
I'm a former military officer and a Open Source zealot.
One of the things
to remember with this story is that US DoD is big. Really big. Bigger than the
biggest employer ever, excepting the entire US Gov't of which it's a part. That
having been said, it's very hard to say that the DoD likes or dislikes anything
- in any group of people that size there will be many conflicting viewpoints.
Of course you can find some OSS zealots in DoD - you can also find some
Microsoft .NET zealots. And Lotus Notes zealots. And whatever.
The closest
thing to a corporate, DoD view of Open Source software is the letter written by
John Stenbit (the ASD(NII); Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and
Information Integration - aka the DoD CIO) which basically said that using OSS
is okay, as long as you pay attention to the license and security rules for
everything else. Stenbit is the only guy who really has the authority to speak
regarding DoD IT policy. Anybody else (including me) is just spouting off about
what the've seen in their own tiny corner of a huge DoD
universe.
Informally, lots of communities do love Linux and other
OSS. But there are many, many with entrenched mindsets that are completely
Windows centric - particularly for the desktop. I cannot offer my users the
choice of a Linux desktop today, because OSD has migrated to an "enterprise
email system" which is M$ based, and the team that runs it refuses to
support anything but Outlook as a client. I have a handful of Unix desktop
users that we've set up with a work-around by running rdesktop to a Windows terminal server just
for Outlook and the occasional MS Office application. While I know about the
various solutions for Unix-based connectivity to Exchange, these require setup
on the Exchange side, which I do not control.
I would say that on the
desktop on DoD, MS Windows and MS Office are king, and unlikely to be unseated
any time soon.
Philosophically, while I personnally use Linux and OSS for
everything I can, I don't push it as the solution for everything at work. My
job as an IT manager is to provide technology support to meet my users' needs in
the most effective and efficient way that I can. So I try to maintain some
degree of neutrality.
That having been said, back a few years ago when I
was more in a developer-type role (also in OSD), I did build significant web
apps on Linux/Apache/PostgreSQL/Perl, which are still running happily today.
The group I was then with now tends to use Zope on Solaris for their new web
solutions. (We've had negative experiences with Linux on Ultrasparc.)
The
views expressed here represent only those of the author of this post, and not of
his employer, government, ISP or mother. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
