Green Hills Software Decides Linux Isn't So Bad

An anonymous reader submits a link to this report on LinuxDevices.com, which begins "An outspoken open source detractor has paid Linux a back-handed compliment. Green Hills Software (GHS), known for diatribes against Linux in military/aerospace applications, is shipping 'Padded Cell technology' intended to enable the company's proprietary real-time OS to take advantage of the wealth of Linux application software." You may remember GHS's Dan O'Dowd, who's claimed that the embedded Linux Tools Market is a myth and that the open source nature of Linux makes it a threat to national security.

closed source is the real threat

[Anonymous Coward]

If there is any threat to national security it is closed source software that is not peer reviewed and comes with the inherent risk of backdoors and vulnerabilities. These day we cannot afford using closed source software anymore. The dangers are simply too high. Open-source needs to be the standard for any type of critical application.

Not Exactly....

[earthforce_1]

From reading the article, I think Green Hills have decided Linux APPs are not so bad, or at least something they feel they need. I don't think they have changed their position on Linux itself.

Re: Therac-25 and direct accountability

[Anonymous Coward]

Ther were several deaths due to a medical device called Therac-25. http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib/Therac_25/The rac_1.html For business purposes, accountability counts for something, but not for national security. The good thing about open source, is that as easy as it might be to install a backdoor, its even easier for someone to diagnose such a problem, possibly proactively. I think its much easier to find, or even train someone, to deal with linux internals than any proprietary system.

Re:Open Source is a threat to National Security.

[Coryoth]

NSA's involvement in Linux amounts to a research project. Although I think it is interesting and useful, it shouldn't be mistaken for an endorsement by the NSA.

I agree. In many ways it was an attempt by the NSA to demonstrate how security should be done - it wasn't even considered an ideal implementation, but simply a demonstration of the right direction, and that it can be easily added to existing systems.

At the same time, however, the NSA doesn't have any obvious issues with the open source nature of Linux. It was precisely that that lead them to use Linux for the demonstration project. While it is hardly an endorsement of open source, the fact they they were willing to work with such a system would imply that at least the INFOSEC division of NSA doesn't see open source as an evil.

Jedidiah.

Re:No news

[Nimrangul]

Sorry to break this to you, but not everyone on that list is really on your side.

IBM is mostly supporting Linux as a shtick rather than completely backing the system and it's ideals, they are not opening up their code in a great big flood of free IBM software.

Sun cannot keep it's mind set straight on what it thinks about damn near anything.

And no, Intel thinks that open isn't so good. It has outright refused requests for proper specs on it's hardware from open source developers that just want to make drivers.

Finally, Munich may have liked the LiMux deal more than the Windows one, but that conversion was halted because of Patent fears in the Union last I saw anything of it.

Re:Stop modding "Troll"

[bani]

it's a troll because that's exactly what it is . it's written by someone who knows damn well what the GPL is and is not, and wrote it explicitly and purposefully to get a rise out of feebleminded readers.

not only that, it's a positively ancient troll from usenet, which morons repost repeatedly all over the net:
the original post from 2002 [google.com]
slashdot repost [slashdot.org]
news.com repost [com.com]

the author of the original article in 2002 has quite a history of trolling:
troll history [google.com]

My guess is he now works for SCO.

it's not a change of heart

[bani]

it's grudging acceptance that their own claims "there is no linux embedded tools market" and that "the Linux tools market will die" are patently false.

they're making a compat layer because their customers are demanding they support nonexistent tools for a dead market. yeah. that's the ticket.

Re:Open Source is a threat to National Security.

[quetzalc0atl]

what you are saying is not entirely true. from the selinux website: "Recognizing the critical role of operating system security mechanisms in supporting security at higher levels, researchers from NSA's Information Assurance Research Group have been investigating an architecture that can provide the necessary security functionality in a manner that can meet the security needs of a wide range of computing environments." this statement clearly says that they picked linux for a reason...i dont know if "endoresement" is the right word. in addition: "Linux was chosen as the platform for this work because its growing success and open development environment provided an opportunity to demonstrate that this functionality can be successful in a mainstream operating system and, at the same time, contribute to the security of a widely used system. Additionally, the integration of these security research results into Linux may encourage additional operating system security research that may lead to additional improvement in system security." sounds like an endorsement to me

Open Source issue, not just a linux issue

[xtermin8]

I'm a little disappointed with thie original post. The change of heart is about open source and the "free software" that runs on linux. Green Hills specifically criticized the open source nature of Linux. I think its pretty clear that much of the linux-compatible apps available are open source. They could have made many other criticisms of linux, but they specifically attacked OSS, and now, perhaps grudgingly, accomadating demand for it.

Re:Dog bites man. General Franco still dead.

[Anonymous Coward]

>>Green Hills makes devtools and OSs for safety-critical embedded systems.

That strikes fear into the very core of my heart. When I first came to graduate school, the project I was working on used a C++ compiler from Green Hills to build code for our robots (which didn't run a Green Hills OS). The compiler was the buggiest piece of shit that I've ever had the pleasure of working with. It died compiling correct C++ code that included templates. (Or it would silently introduce incorrect behavior) It wouldn't let us use single precision floating point math - we had to use doubles for everything or that math routines would crash. A couple of years later, we were finally able to switch to GCC and life became much happier. (Well, as happy as the lives of grad students ever get)

These guys make tools for safety critical systems? Like heart monitors and stuff? ::shudder:: I've only ever used that one particular product of theirs, so I don't know about their stuff in general, but I sure wouldn't bet my life on anything that comes out of their company.

Re:Open Source is a threat to National Security.

[Qzukk]

Actually, it sounds more like an endorsement in the opensource way than in Linux itself. "Look, we'll contribute to the community so that the community will grow a @#%# clue and learn how to write secure systems."

Re:Open source nature of Linux is a threat !

[xtermin8]

In criticising linux, they have rather strongly criticized Open Source. Perhaps that was a strategic mistake, because much of the available software for linux is also open source. This is a change of heart. Its a shame the article isn't more clear about the conflict. Many of us (especially BSD fans) have long criticized linux, but champion open source and other "free" software

Following in the footsteps of Wind River

[dmh20002]

Jerry whats his name of Wind River/Vxworks frequently issued anti-Linux screeds, but suddenly stopped about the day before Wind River announced a Linux product.

BSD Rules!- how to critique linux

[xtermin8]

BSD users, and perhaps we can include Apple OSX users among them, have made valid criticisms of linux for a long time now. None of us have sunk to the depths of declaring linux a threat to national security because it is open source. It is perfectly reasonable to act as Green Hills Software has, in providing a compatibility layer. The irresponsible public statements they have made is another matter.

Re:GPL: Intellectual Theft

[bob beta]

Nice troll.

Nice fishie. Why did you bite on his fishing plug?

He's moderated down into the mud and you're just encouraging us to click on the 'below current threshold' link to see what he said that riled you.

Somewhat reminds me..

[strlen]

Somewhat reminds me of a local tech paper's editor. Back in 1997/1998 he wrote a rather angry, extremely ignorant and mocking reply to a letter to an editor which spoke about Linux, mocking Linux as being old technology and of no use (and for the letter writer's gall to criticize AOL!).

Then, I remember in about 2001/2002 he was waxing poetic about Linux and answerting Linux questions right and left.

That's of course about the time I went to BSD (in situations where it isn't masochistic), hype serves no purpose.

Re:Think open source, but not open source!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, if you read the GHS whitepapers, they don't criticize OSS. They criticize the use of OSS in security-sensitive appplications.

I'm an open source developer. I'd be scared s**tless if I found out someone was relying on my code to build a cruise missile.

Counldn not have come at a better time!!!

[Mynorrrr]

The Australian OSDC http://www.osdc.com.au/ [osdc.com.au] is being held in Melbourne over the next three days. During this conferenence there is a paper discussing Mr O'Dowds comments over the last few months. This back flip just adds weight to the arguments to be presented at the conference. It feels good to be vindicated.