June 4, 2002 03:29 pm, J. Craig Woods wrote: > Good food for thought. The only effective opposition is an INFORMED > opposition. > > drjung > > Study: Open source poses security risks > > By Matthew Broersma > Special to ZDNet > June 3, 2002 > > 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." > > Interesting, > drjung ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Wassup doc? (I'm sorry but I couldn't resist.)
I've been forwarding links to, and copies of, this drivel from various and sundry web sources to people since I first read it. The responses ranged from; "How much is Microsoft paying them for this crap?" from an aunt of a good friend, to his reply which is unfit for quotation on a polite mailing list such as this. :-) Only one person seemed to think any of may have any basis in fact; but she works for a local computer shop and doesn't know from Open Source. I have a feeling the gang she works with will be furthering her education real soon now. As long as they're stating opinions with no basis in truth, or any research to prove anything they say, I'll say that the only truth I see in the entire article is in the last paragraph. "they should study the potential consequences carefully" because when they do they'll likely run screaming away from MS. BTW did you know that the ZDNet Forum "Computer Help" was; for a very long time, the "online support" link for Windows ME? Isn't _that_ just "special?" ZDNet. Another site that I choose not to open. -- Charlie Edmonton,AB,Canada Registered user 244963 at http://counter.li.org God gave man two ears and one tongue so that we listen twice as much as we speak. -- Arab proverb
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
