Slashdot Mirror
Which Government Agencies are *nix-Friendly?
payneLess asks: "I have noticed since the Sept. 11 attacks, there is renewed emphasis on beefing up the nation's military, law enforcement and intelligence-gathering capabilities. Presumably, some of the dollars to accomplish this will go to improving their information systems and recruiting quality IT people, which with the slow economy might present some rewarding opportunities. Since I know many .gov and .mil geeks read Slashdot, my question is, besides NASA, are there any agencies that doing cool things with Linux or BSD? Aside from the NSA's security-enhanced Linux project and DARPA throwing a bunch of cash at NAI Labs to develop Trusted BSD, is anybody actually using *nix on a wide scale for day-to-day tasks? One of the reasons I left DoD a few years ago for the private sector was because nobody seemed interested in thinking outside the box and everyone was perfectly content letting the vendors and contractors ram Microsoft, Solaris, and other proprietary stuff down their throats, nor was there any institutional interest in changing over to open source."
The Department of Navy will become even less *nix friendly with the full deployment of the Navy-Marine Core Intranet (NMCI). This initiative is to standarize all desktops, laptops, and servers to one platform, in this case Windows 2000 and both the servers and the desktops, all of it outsourced to EDS. Outside of tasks that require a *nix box, the choice is actually no choice at all: Dell boxes running Windows 2000.
BigCat79
"The dead have risen and are voting Republican!" --Bart Simpson
"One of the reasons I left DoD a few years ago for the private sector was because nobody seemed interested in thinking outside the box"
Since when does the use of open source software equate to "thinking outside the box"? I would think that government agencies have more important criteria for a system than "can we play with the source code?".
If they need some new software, they're not going to hop on over to freshmeat. They're going to decide the function of the software. Then they're going to hire somebody to design a system that accomplishes that exact task. I'm sure there's instances on needing to maintain or upgrade software in the government, but all that means is that they need to be in possession of the source code, the code doesn't need to be sitting on source forge though.
If you did work at the DoD (which I have not), I would think that you'd realize that their use for software is to accomplish a specific task, and it's not for having fun, or sticking it to MS.
BTW, Taco, do you guys have a clapper installed on the db server or what?
I wish I was financially able or had enough passion to leave a job because they didn't change over to open source or wouldn't "think outside the box". I'm content to earn a living, knowing that there will be things that I don't like or agree with. I'll save my moral stands for something that matters.
I left a company in '95 that was switching to All MSFT, All The Time. If you think about the state of the MSFT world at the time (WfWG, Windows 3.11, NT 3.51), it made sense. Manager types seemed to believe that NT 3.51 would be cheaper/easier/more productive/have zero defects/shove fried chicked under their drooling chins. The rather different reality made me think twice. Did I want to get caught between Manager Expectations and Shitty NT reality? No. Also, working with Windows was substantially less fun than working with SunOS/Solaris. I quit. That company became little more than an MSFT reseller - they never did anything interesting, and they finally disappeared.
Moving to a company that uses Unix and open source stuff isn't a matter of principal - it's a matter of survival. Remember: your NT certification expires in December, you'll have to get W2K or XP certification at a great cost. In two years, your XP certification will expire and you'll have to get YP certification, again, at great cost.
And all the free software available (GNU utils, Perl code, Python code, MySQL, etc.) helps keep taxpayer costs way down.
My God, just imagine if the gov't contributed just a fraction of the cost savings over equivalent commercial software to the open-source vendors! Not only would the taxpayers still save money, but all the free software coders out there would actually have even more incentive to churn out good stuff.
Is anybody aware of the gov't actually paying for this free stuff as an incentive for continued development?
I work at NSA. It varied widely as to what people used, usually dependent on the person's job & duties.
The current "official" platform is NT 4 (Win2K has not yet been approved). Many people still use Sun for their work, and a few use Linux or Win2K or whatever else is appropriate. The SELinux is not used as it is considered a prototype/research product. Many servers are some flavor of *NIX, probably Solaris
Techies generally choose what they want depending on their job duties (some people have multiple machines at their desk), non-techies almost always have NT.
An encouraging word for Linux is that there was one guy soliciting help on the internal newsgroups that he was trying to get Linux to be the next official enterprise baseline for the desktop workstations. However, since the 11th, network use is required to be kept at a minimum, so he hasnt been able to do much on that front.
Also, because of the current position of NSA's activities, major changes wont happen anytime soon.
The reason we still use NT 4 as opposed to a more current version is because we must take time to evaluate the system's usefulness and how converting will impact mission. ALL software products go through this evaluation before we can use it on mission systems. (ie - Office 97 is still current, not 2K or XP)