Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Linux Security, Red Hat and Systemd Conspiracy

posted by Dopefish on Thursday February 20 2014, @07:30AM   Printer-friendly
from the penguins-everywhere dept.

An anonymous coward writes "Former cypherpunk shares his conspiratorial view on Linux security:

Since then, more has happened to reveal the true story here, the depth of which surprised even me. The GTK development story and the systemd debate on Debian revealed much corporate pressure being brought to bear in Linux. [...] Some really startling facts about Red Hat came to light. For me the biggest was the fact that the US military is Red Hat's largest customer:

"When we rolled into Baghdad, we did it using open source," General Justice continued. "It may come as a surprise to many of you, but the U.S. Army is 'the' single largest install base for Red Hat Linux. I'm their largest customer." (2008)

This is pretty much what I had figured. I'm not exactly new to this, and I figured that in some way the military-industrial/corporate/intelligence complex was in control of Red Hat and Linux. [...] But I didn't expect it to be stated so plainly. Any fool should realize that "biggest customer" doesn't mean tallest or widest, it means the most money. In other words, most of Red Hat's money comes from the military and, as a result, they have significant pull in its development. In that respect, the connection between the military and spying agencies, etc. should be obvious.

Next, the FOSDEM: NSA Operation ORCHESTRA Annual Status Report is well worth watching in its entirety (including the Q&A at the end). To me, this turned out to be a road-map detailing how Red Hat is operating on Linux!"

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Linux Security, Red Hat and Systemd Conspiracy | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 45 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Eunuchswear on Thursday February 20 2014, @11:12AM

    by Eunuchswear (525) on Thursday February 20 2014, @11:12AM (#3343) Journal

    More to the point, if the US Army is going to run on Linux since when is it in their interest to have Linux be easily crackable by their enemies.

    Can we have some paranoia about TOR being written by US Naval Intelligence please.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video [youtube.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Funny=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   4  

  • (Score: 1) by pteros on Friday February 21 2014, @04:01PM

    by pteros (1900) on Friday February 21 2014, @04:01PM (#4388)

    More to the point, if the US Army is going to run on Linux since when is it in their interest to have Linux be easily crackable by their enemies.

    Because knowing the vulnerabilities beforehand gives you the competitive edge over adversaries and you might want to have it rather than having a level-playing field.

    For US, with by epic margin the largest military budget, this seems logical.