>Open-Source Fight Flares At Pentagon >Microsoft Lobbies Hard Against Free Software ><http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html> > >By Jonathan Krim >Washington Post Staff Writer >Thursday, May 23, 2002; Page E01 > >Microsoft Corp. is aggressively lobbying the Pentagon to squelch its >growing use of freely distributed computer software and switch to >proprietary systems such as those sold by the software giant, >according to officials familiar with the campaign. > >In what one military source called a "barrage" of contacts with >officials at the Defense Information Systems Agency and the office of >Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld over the past few months, the >company said "open source" software threatens security and its >intellectual property. > >But the effort may have backfired. A May 10 report prepared for the >Defense Department concluded that open source often results in more >secure, less expensive applications and that, if anything, its use >should be expanded. > >"Banning open source would have immediate, broad, and strongly >negative impacts on the ability of many sensitive and security-focused >DOD groups to protect themselves against cyberattacks," said the >report, by Mitre Corp.
<text deleted> >Microsoft also said open-source software is inherently less secure >because the code is available for the world to examine for flaws, >making it possible for hackers or criminals to exploit >them. Proprietary software, the company argued, is more secure because >of its closed nature. A master of the security half-truth chimes in... >"I've never seen a systematic study that showed open source to be more >secure," said Dorothy Denning, a professor of computer science at >Georgetown University who specializes in information warfare. >John Stenbit, an assistant secretary of defense and the Defense >Department's chief information officer, said Microsoft has said using >free software with commercial software might violate the >intellectual-property rights of companies such as Microsoft. Stenbit >said the issue is legally "murky." <much deleted> >Stenbit said the debate is academic and that what matters is how >secure a given piece of software is. To that end, the Defense >Department is now prohibited from purchasing any software that has not >undergone security testing by the NSA. Stenbit said he is unaware of >any open-source software that has been tested. This should present no problem for open source software. No purchase takes place since the software is "free" by definition. steve