Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

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This discussion has been archived.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.
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: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 20 2014, @01:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 20 2014, @01:13PM (#3402)

    What success? How many people switched to systemd because they wanted systemd? I was there when Arch Linux decided to force people to switch to systemd - and I write "force", because that's what it was. The official announcement said that it was due to lack of volunteers to maintain initscripts, after which they proceeded to ban anyone from the forums who even hinted at volunteering to maintain initscripts.

    Who gives a damn about log files being binary? I'll tell you who - cat, vi, grep and all the others. You know, the whole range of unix tools. And no, journalctl will NOT happily spit out anything in plain text. Not when you need it the most, when some major system component like journalctl keeps crashing, and the kernel keeps spitting out log messages (that go to said binary log) telling wtf went wrong.

    No, many unix tools do not use binary files. A few do, and they all have one thing in common. They are not a necessary part of the system. Sendmail is one example of such a tool, but when the system is down, sendmail is not the first thing you care about. Find out why the system is down (check the log), get it back up and running, and then worry about sendmail when said binary tools are working again. Nobody ever suggested replacing syslogd with sendmail, because that would be stupid. It still is.

    When you say that using a binary format does not mean that it's suddenly Windows Event Viewer, you need to realise that the Windows Event Viewer comparison is not about the GUI or whatever you think it is. It's about a log that needs a special program to show it, a log that can't be read with notepad or vi or awk. And that is exactly what the systemd log format is, according to their own documentation. Saying that its not like Windows Event Viewer, IS saying that it's all plain text, and contradictory to the rest of your argument.

    Systemd is everything that for some of us were the reason we did not choose Windows or OSX. And if you want to argue that we are wrong for not wanting to use systemd for the same reasons, you are not just arguing for systemd. You are arguing for switching to OSX or Windows.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=2, Informative=1, Total=5
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by DarkMorph on Thursday February 20 2014, @02:20PM

    by DarkMorph (674) on Thursday February 20 2014, @02:20PM (#3444)
    I'd like to leave this [ewontfix.com] here, since no one else has yet.

    I still run Gentoo where systemd is an option that isn't enabled by default. OpenRC and initscripts - I'm quite content with them. I also use Arch Linux at work which, of course, has systemd. So far what I've noticed that bugs me is that sometimes the journal daemon will just consume one CPU core to 100% for a short time and I don't see any distinct reason as to why that is.

    I also was a little frustrated when certain mechanisms I have with rc-update apparently don't exist with systemctl. And yes, I've done man systemctl to check.
  • (Score: 1) by minus9 on Thursday February 20 2014, @03:17PM

    by minus9 (1232) on Thursday February 20 2014, @03:17PM (#3485)

    Sendmail's config files aren't binary, they might look like they are...

    Some of the text files are converted to Berkley DB to speed things up.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Lagg on Thursday February 20 2014, @04:36PM

    by Lagg (105) on Thursday February 20 2014, @04:36PM (#3559) Homepage Journal

    What success? How many people switched to systemd because they wanted systemd? I was there when Arch Linux decided to force people to switch to systemd - and I write "force", because that's what it was. The official announcement said that it was due to lack of volunteers to maintain initscripts, after which they proceeded to ban anyone from the forums who even hinted at volunteering to maintain initscripts.

    I've been using Arch since around 2005 and I consider systemd one of the best decisions ever made. My server downtime is reduced significantly and maintenance as a whole when adding/removing services is much safer feeling. No one is forcing you to do anything, there are probably no less than 8 init packages on AUR. As for "banning anyone" I'm guessing that you really mean "banning me" and by volunteering to maintain initscripts I'm guessing you mean "because I was being a flaming jackass". Granted, I will reconsider this position if you link to proof. I would sure as hell want to know if this is happening as I don't want to support such activity.

    Who gives a damn about log files being binary? I'll tell you who - cat, vi, grep and all the others. You know, the whole range of unix tools. And no, journalctl will NOT happily spit out anything in plain text. Not when you need it the most, when some major system component like journalctl keeps crashing, and the kernel keeps spitting out log messages (that go to said binary log) telling wtf went wrong.

    journalctl --boot | grep -i "session opened for user root" | vi -

    Could optimize that, but not the point. I've never had journalctl segfault on me on any install so far. Not that I'm dismissing the possibility. But that's hardly an argument against it. Things get bugs, and they'll be fixed.

    No, many unix tools do not use binary files. A few do, and they all have one thing in common. They are not a necessary part of the system. Sendmail is one example of such a tool, but when the system is down, sendmail is not the first thing you care about. Find out why the system is down (check the log), get it back up and running, and then worry about sendmail when said binary tools are working again. Nobody ever suggested replacing syslogd with sendmail, because that would be stupid. It still is.

    Try again, sendmail is not the only thing that used dbm by far and it only used it for caching. It was otherwise m4.

    When you say that using a binary format does not mean that it's suddenly Windows Event Viewer, you need to realise that the Windows Event Viewer comparison is not about the GUI or whatever you think it is. It's about a log that needs a special program to show it, a log that can't be read with notepad or vi or awk. And that is exactly what the systemd log format is, according to their own documentation. Saying that its not like Windows Event Viewer, IS saying that it's all plain text, and contradictory to the rest of your argument.

    When did I say it has anything to do with the GUI? I wouldn't glorify such comparisons to such an extent. What it really is is a knee-jerk reaction. The similarities to event viewer begin and end at the fact that log data isn't plain text. People such as yourself use that as ammo to say "but now I can't read it with vi or awk D:" which is entirely false. People have since forever piped log data, regardless of source, through multiple programs before getting output. That is still easily done with journalctl but with added filtering due to the record metadata.

    Systemd is everything that for some of us were the reason we did not choose Windows or OSX. And if you want to argue that we are wrong for not wanting to use systemd for the same reasons, you are not just arguing for systemd. You are arguing for switching to OSX or Windows.

    Huh... That is sure a leap of logic. Are you perhaps the submitter?

    --
    http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
  • (Score: 1) by Subsentient on Thursday February 20 2014, @07:12PM

    by Subsentient (1111) on Thursday February 20 2014, @07:12PM (#3642) Homepage Journal
    Here's my card [universe2.us], let me know when you're ready to talk.
    --
    "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti