bvc Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 not if there are no "Windows network protocols" to communicate with ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 not if there are no "Windows network protocols" to communicate with ;) does that mean there is other solutions than smb (Samba) to make Linux servers / Windows clients communicate each other ? or do you mean the French state should switch the servers and the clients as well to Linux, all in a row ? ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 good move mdk! Linux in the US gov, unheard of. Oh wait, whats that SELinux the NSA runs? Yeah, there a .gov. :lol: The reason most Linux vendors don't get certified is because it cost a lot of money to go through the test, but now RH & Suse certianly have the money for it, or someone like IBM/HP/Novel can flip the bill. BTW, the USA Gov runs linux in a lot of places, already mentioned the NSA, they use Linux systems in some of there tank and other vehicle radar tracking systems. They might not tell you all over the News, but they are running Linux in certian places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 Oh wait, whats that SELinux the NSA runs? Yeah, there a .gov. :lol: SELinux isn't run on production systems. Technically speaking, within the Department of Defense, Linux is not a sanctioned O/S for production use. Testing environments only is the rule. That doesn't mean people don't go ahread and do it anyways, but the rules say no Linux on production systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arlen Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 for this to happen, atleast within the Department of Defense, a Linux distribution has to get a C2 security rating (meaning it's possible to make it meet the C2 standards). Red Hat Linux is currently going for this certification. C2 Orange Book or C2 Red Book? Orange is relatively simple. Red Book is harder. In both cases I question its utility. They belong to a bygone era, when changes in the industry happened over the course of decades, not minutes. C2 certification is for a specific hardware and software configuration; deviate one bit and the cert is invalid. Apply the kernel patch which covers the cracker exploit just recently discovered, and the cert is no longer valid (I'm not aware of a single example of a bug found during certification, though the fact that NT4 received the cert should be ample evidence that bugs have passed through unnoticed). The testing sequence is long; if you wait for the patch to be tested and certified before you apply it, you're toast. If you apply it, you're protected, but no longer certified. (Yes, that's a catch-22; it's also the truth. When I was in the service, we had to get both facilities and security to sign off on the disposition of disc storage. But we couldn't dispose of it until facilities signed off, and they wouldn't sign off until security signed off, and security wouldn't sign off until the storage was disposed. It's the way life in the DoD works.) Bottom line: C2 is minimally secure, but add a peripheral or a s/w patch, and you have to go through the testing process again, so it's of little practical value. Novell went for it, so MS felt they had to, now RH seems to be joining the game. It's a waste of time and money, but it gives you another set of letters to add to the marketing pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbob Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 Bottom line: C2 is minimally secure, but add a peripheral or a s/w patch, and you have to go through the testing process again, so it's of little practical value. Novell went for it, so MS felt they had to, now RH seems to be joining the game. It's a waste of time and money, but it gives you another set of letters to add to the marketing pitch. You nailed that right on the head, and when you mentioned the fact NT4 made it through the process you were reading my mind. It's a waste of resources and I'll bet the only reason RH is after it is to prevent MS spin doctoring of the issue. But it means virtually nothing in the real world, I had a contract where the client wanted us to get as close as possible to the spec for his new Win 2K servers, we tried for several weeks but patching made it virutally impossible so eventually even the client saw what a waste of time it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 All I'm saying is the .gov runs linux on servers. I don't know what specs they say (production/test/dev) whatever, they do run Linux. That is all I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reb2 Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 B) excellent work mandrakesoft. today france tomorrow the world? i hope not, i'm a brit! the world will take notice and the rest will fall like dominoes (i hope). roll on the linux revolution. and me a nooby! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzatch Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 The US military is rapidly moving to linux in all new computer systems in the field. The Stryker weapons vehicle uses Linux. And now after failed testing with the M$ OS, Linux was chosen for the Land Warrior system. What was funny was M$ would crash the system in less than an hour of continuos use and kill the battery in less than 3 hours. 6 guys proposed and rewrote a linux system for it and the first day in the field it never failed and ran for 6 hours on the same batteries. It also integrated all the needed systems faster than that other OS, which never got everything working at once in over two years of testing. M$ was told they lost the contract that week. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/land-warrior.htm http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=1238 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphitus Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 Doesnt the US legal system already use Linux? if so, then a third of the US government uses Linux already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.