Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Unbreakable Linux'

Posted by michael on from the kids-call-me-mr.-glass dept.

Zadig writes "It appears as if Dell, Oracle, and Red Hat CEOs have decided to make 'Unbreakable Linux'. Could a giant arise amidst today's insecure and constantly patched linux world that could hold the title of Unbreakable Linux? I doubt it, but it will be fun to try, what are your thoughts?" There's a similar article on CNet.

7 of 430 comments (clear)

  1. Wow, taking on IBM mainframes... by killthiskid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To quote Oracle CEO Larry Ellison


    "That is why we have been seriously looking at Linux in the last six months," said Ellison. "Because Linux is perfect for clustering. People say is Linux ready for prime time? Is it reliable? Is it fast? With clusters, it is fast enough and with no single point of failure. Clusters are fault tolerant. A cluster of four Linux machines is more reliable and less expensive than an IBM mainframe. The problem with traditional database is that you are constantly in an endless upgrade cycle. The biggest benefit to our midrange user is the economics."

    Taking on IBM? Taking on IBM mainframes? That is truly a serious statement.


    If nobody ever gets (got?) fired for buying IBM, what does this mean?

    1. Re:Wow, taking on IBM mainframes... by FatOldGoth · · Score: 5, Funny

      Give me 16 "Unbreakable Linux" PowerEdges and some damned fat pipes and I can design you a cluster that a nuclear attack probably couldn't take out.

      Cool. If you do consultancy then it may be a good time to start marketing your services in the Indian subcontinent.

      --

      I would be a paid subscriber if Taco and Hemos weren't such cunts
  2. Unbreakable & unsinkable? by ilyag · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will it be called Titanux?

    No intention to be troll...

  3. "Unbreakable Linux" by Feren · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This will be interesting. Perhaps the coalition will take lessons on exactly how to achieve this goal from our friends over at OpenBSD, who are working towards much the same goal with BSD. One of the first lessons they should learn is realistic goal setting. The second lesson they should take from OpenBSD is the understanding of the impact that a remote exploit can have, versus one that is only available to users local to the system.

    Another lesson that this new coalition should learn is humility. I would hope after the "Unbreakable" campaign Oracle launched, and the blowback it received, that they'd take the time to tone down their attitude and ensure they're somewhere near as unbreakable as they'd like to think. If their claims aren't so grandiose they're less likely to suffer an explosive userland reaction when a flaw is (and there will be flaws, it's just Murphy's law) is discovered.

    Otherwise, I applaud the idea. Linux can benefit from a hardened, secure-from-the-box distribution initiative powered by folks with the pockets to fund the massive codewalks it will take to tighten things up. OpenBSD brought several benefits to the BSD community, I can see this doing much the same thing.

  4. Wow these guys are serious by eddeye · · Score: 5, Funny

    A spokesman confirmed that 'Unbreakable Linux' machines will ship without any I/O devices and be encased in a 10 foot cube of concrete.

    --
    Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
  5. Enough of this crap.. by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Programmers don't make systems secure. Admins do. No system in the world be it software, hardware, electronic or mechanical, can be any more secure than the people who maintain it allow it to be. Yes, default settings, and auto-patches and fancy protocols help, but at the end of that day 99.99% of hacks occur because either:

    a) User Error (@see shitty passwords)

    or

    b) The system was not kept up to date.

    Beyond that, nothing can be unbreakable. There will always be the 0.01% of hacks that occur because of a design fault, and you will never get rid of that 0.01% no matter how many eyeballs you have. But if you're serious about security use good passwords, and keep your system up to date. Sure it's not sexy, and it won't make stock prices jump, and most of the time it isn't much fun, but unless you're the NSA you will never, ever have to do more than those two things to keep your system safe.

    I forget who said it, but right after 9/11, some talking head on TV asked some expert "What can Americans do to stay safe after these attacks?" and the expert answered "Buckle your seat-belt and quit smoking".

    Occam's razor strikes again.

    1. Re:Enough of this crap.. by Arandir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, but it's still easier for the admin to secure the machine if he doesn't have to start with swiss cheese.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned