Slashdot Mirror
MS Proposes Disclosing Windows Source To India
raghuram writes "Interesting news from Economic Times of India, I found an interesting story, Microsoft Planning to Share Code with India." He excerpts from that article: "Microsoft has already made a proposal to the ministry of information technology (of India) for sharing the Windows source code with one government body. The nature of the body has not been spelt out; it will presumably be worked out after discussions between the company and the government officials. Interestingly, the offer comes at a time when state governments are showing interest in rival Linux operating system as the latter's source code is free and downloadable from the internet."
I give them 6 hours before the source is leaked and we can peruse (and be horrified) at our leisure.
Dyolf Knip
I'm sure M$ is just covering their ass and giving an excuse to foreign governments not to switch to Linux. Of course, if makes you wonder if India can be convinced to leak it. It would only take one person and one copy....
It sounds like Microsoft is running scared now. They realise that India is a powerhose because it has way more people (population) than the United States.
India seems to be tilted toward linux right now and if the linux movement there gets into full swing, the momentum will be very, very hard for Microsoft to stop.
I hope the Indians look to the long terms effects of the windows and linux paths, as opposed to short terms benefits.
Sweet: If Windows source is made available in India and becomes available worldwide.
Sour: If Windows source is already available to selected developers right here at home, why hasn't someone leaked it?
My understanding of "Shared Source" was that Microsoft shows you theirs if you promise not to tell what it looks like. I naturally assumed that with the code being such a closely held secret, that it would be on the newsgroups before you could say groups-dot-google-dot-com.
But then, it may just be my ignorance showing... I'm just a VB coder staying away from the bleeding edge -- in order to provide my clients with code that works the same way each time.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's important to use the "free software" expression instead of "open source".
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
... they aren't willing to share source code in the U.S. for "security" reasons, but they are willing to pass on the source code to a country in the midst of a volatile conflict with a growing nuclear weapons program ...
...
and so now it's friday the 13th per GMT. maybe this is a fitting time to run the story
when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
The real reason is to make sure that developers who see their source code can't later work on open-source projects without "polluting" the open-source project. I will never look at M$ source code, for that, among other, reasons.
But could you imagine the damage if M$ was successful in claiming that their code ended up in a linux kernel? Or apache? or php? or perl? or gcc?
I'm wondering what disclosing the source would actually matter?
/not/ it's open source code, but instead it is the support of the worldwide developer community. Granted that this community would never have formed unless the source was public, but I doubt that would ever help Windows because no matter how open the source is, people are A) not going to submit patches (and MS would never accept them) and B) the source was never meant to be publicaly readable so I doubt it makes any real sense and probably requires a quite complex dependancy tree that will doubtfully be released.
I know what you're thinking, you're thinking "but look what it did for Linux!", but I'm going to disagree with that supposition.
I must maintain that the reason of Linux's success is
These are all for good reason. Not only will one massive lost market initate several others, but India also represents a leading software high-tech zone that Microsoft does not want to lose. Think of the number of Linux programmers that would be learning to work on a real platform in five year if the government does not 'sell out' to this US monopoly.
I can't disclose really any more than this, but expect more concessions from the Redmond Giant before all is said and done. Hopefully India's Linux initiatives have not been just to facilitate dealing with M$.
Microsoft's dike is springing many holes. Thiy might fill this one, but products like the one below will be taking serious bites out of MSFT in the coming months...
http://www.distrowatch.com/review-xandros.php
Hunger is the best sauce.
if this may be related somehow to this recent announcement regarding IBM's recent software initiatives in India. On a slightly related question, how would any of this relate to the recent rumors of both IBM and MS vying to purchase Rational and Borland? My take is this: IBM may be the number 2 software vendor, but as a company MS knows they could be choked on for breakfast in terms of sheer scale as reflected in US dollars. Upon reading about the recent sentiments in India, my vote goes with Big Blue.
C|N>K
If it is a precedent being set, then it could very well be how the population of an entire country operates.
Most people think that 'operating systems' are something that are confined to the workings of computers. History, however, would point out that the term 'computer' used to refer to a person, whose job was to compute (with an abacus or something). Similarly, an 'operating system' also affects how people perform their jobs... Have you ever had somebody tell you something like 'OK, so click Start, Programs, Office, Word' And without thinking, you go through a set of motions that are nearly instinctual? That's an example of how people use operating systems to communicate information and tasks to other people.
I digress a bit. The way I see it, the United States has sort of a 'protective ward' or 'shield' against this kind of stuff, because the USA has a 250+ year old operating system which the federal government uses. The code? Written down in the US Constitution.
Anyhow, the way I see it, you are right, sharing the source code of their OS with a government does seem like its setting a bit of an odd precedent. As far as I can tell, it's sort of like saying, 'OK, we'll organize your billion people just like we organize our files on a supercomputer.' And every person gets a profile, access, authority, and authentication to certain network resources (can you say access control lists (ACLS)?). Hmmm.
It seems to me that it's suggesting a rather Brave-New-World-esque operating system for India. Very, very weird precedent.
I doubt anyone has access to 100% of the source. I am just guessing, but, you probably would only have access to the portion you are supposed to work on, it must consist of thousands of discreet elements, and if you leaked one they wouldn't have very many people to look at to figure out who had done it.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
If you want to look at the source to ensure yourself that there is no NSA/CIA/M$ malware or trojans there, how do you know you are looking at the right thing? Will M$ actually let you USE the source and create your own certified Win distribution? Using your own trusted compiler?
Don't think so.
)9TSS
Unless microsoft plans on releasing the source code for every windows update patch as well, they will still be able to maintain as much control as they have always had (re: too much)
Show them any evidence and they'll make up a story about tampering and fake video and blah blah. Theres no getting through to these people. Even funnier is the group who still believes the world isn't round.
By this gesture MS is acknowledging that the source code is important. Hopefully India is smart enough to see that MS offers the source as a last resort where as Linux offers the source code (plain and simple).
There are 3 sources bases which can plausibly be called the windows source. The original source based which started with DOS and windows 1 and went on up to windows 95 and Windows Millenium. The 'portable windows' CE which is its own code base. And the NT code base which is the one people would want.
It might make a lot of sense for MS to give out the source to the windows 95 codebase, as it is old and decrepit and would cost more to understand than to reimplement.
Windows CE has a very small market and giving out the source base might be its last gasp.
Some are actually easier and faster to install. I installed a distro called Lycoris the other week that has a similar approach to Lindows. I'm not saying this is the way to go, but it was really fast and simple to install, and the PC looks and reacts similar to Windows XP, but costs $0.
In other words, my computer illiterate Dad could use it.
If Windows didn't already come pre-installed (due to the monopoly factor) then people like my Dad probably would be considering the free alternative if he was made aware of it. Fact is that I don't know ANYONE that has purchased Windows at full price, for personal use. It's always bundled or corporate.
Why has the Windows Source Code, arguably the most valuable piece of source code in history, never been leaked?
;-)
I'll give you some answers. I won't go into details of me personally, which you hopefully understand after reading this but here's the few personal things I _will_ say:
- I worked for M$
- I was not a developer
- I had full access to the source of a Windows version (it was not an NT/2K/XP variant, the source was available to everyone on the M$ network who knew where to find it)
- this was several years ago, things have changed, no doubt
Now, back to answering your question. First of all, some common sense answers:
- because it would be illegal?
- because they are not anti-M$?
- because it doesn't occur to them that it would be a 'good thing' to do?
I'll take your suggestions backwards:
Microsoft's security is just that good?
Obviously not.
People are too scared of Microsoft to do it, even with anonymizing technology?
Exactly, I think your question answered that already quite nicely when you said "arguably the most valuable piece of source code in history"
with all that in mind someone would consider:
- who would want to risk a reasonable career, for exactly what?
- who knows if my access to the source is watermarked?
- as someone suggested with the analogy of the Coke formula: is it really that unique that it's worth risking anything for? (believe me, it's not. In fact you CAN look at large pieces of M$ source, just go download a DDK)
Now, from what I have seen, there _is_ some evidence that could have helped the DOJ case regarding the non-competitive stuff with DR-DOS which can be found in the source.
This may have been a valid reason for someone to leak it, but the question is, would you trust the government or anyone enough to protect you so that you can continue the live that you want to have, after you did?
Or even more importantly, should the government be able to get and find this information by it's own, legal, resources?
I think it's a tough choice to risk an already way too short time as a productive developer to deal with lawsuits and what not.
Just a few thoughts
(I trust Rob to provide the "anonymizing technology")
No.
It seems a given that in 1-2 years OpenOffice.org will be able to provide nearly everything that MS Office does and perhaps more. Plus, it will be completely free in every sense of the word.
I think it seems just as reasonable to think that in the same amount of time either KDE, Gnome, or Enlightenment will provide desktop environments that can rival anything MS can provide, and for absolutely no cost.
Also, I think there is another revolution coming. In the past Java programs of any great signifcance have been unusable by anything but high end hardware because of memory requirements.
I have every reason to believe that in 1-2 years, if a top quality desktop environment is not provided by one of the three I named above, that it will be done by developers in Java.
Right now anyone can go any write a Java application to look and function exactly like Explorer.exe. The only problem is that it takes 20Mb to run (which, if you look, is really not much more than Explorer.exe takes), and a relatively fast processor.
However, with 2Ghz+ processors becoming the norm, and 512Mb ram becoming standard, there is no reason that it can not be done.
A group of developers could duplicate anything in Windows, in Java in a very small amount of time.
It appears that all Microsoft were doing (.Net this .Net that) was to distruct competition from what they really wanted - introduce more anti-competitive practices through discount deals for SMEs, taking over Borland, bribing Indian govt, Palladium...If that wasn't the case they could have made .Net server released perhaps.
Is full-blown war with OpenSource/Linux/IBM/Sun... just starting?
Remember, Microsoft invented "embrace and extend" and FUD.
Perhaps the former, but for the latter, you can thank IBM. They perfected FUD in the Mainframe market when the finally had some competition in the form of a disgruntled engineer, Gene Amdahl.
Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
This is what Microsoft constantly misses with their "shared source" and other programs - it's not merely being able to LOOK at the sources as if they were museum pieces on display that is worth anything. The power of open source is that you can build those sources and use the executables. If there are security holes in the software, having a pile of source that you can't build and run is completely useless - you can never know if what you have is the source for the product it claims or is a really complicated BIOS for your toaster oven. Auditing a complete unknown set of sources that claim to be something is something - but you have no buildable proof - would be a colossal mistake.
While this is certainly interesting, I think Microsoft does see some value in what you describe.
There's at least one piece of code MS distributes which is buildable, and that's Rotor (aka the SSCLI (Shared Source Common Language Infrastructure). I'm not sure if there are others or not that allow you to do this (maybe WinCE?).
Other than the fact that it seems Microsoft does recognize the value in buildable sources, there is another problem with what you say. You don't need buildable proof. What you do need is an automatic way to map binaries to source. Preferably while you step through the code in a debugger (or a kernel debugger if that's what you're interested in).
And lo-and-behold, this completely exists. First, you can download the symbols for the version of Windows you're using. But generally the symbols MS distributes to the public don't contain the detailed information that you would need to peek into the source. I would imagine that along with the source code MS would give you the full symbols (why not, they're not giving you more information - you have the source code already!)
But additionally, MS also makes available "checked" builds of their operating system. These will include a much larger amount of debugging information (including assertions which to make sure everything's sane at test time, but slow down execution).
And this, I think, is where the real value of source code lies in. It's not the ability to build the source code, it's not the ability to audit the source code (that's MS's job, not MS's customers job), and it's not the ability to fix security holes. What's REALLY good about having source code is the ability to debug.
When you're relying upon ANY API, and you call into it and it does something you don't expect, having the source code is priceless. And all you need to use it is the source & symbols for the API. You could be missing the makefiles and it wouldn't matter - you're never going to trace into the makefiles.
but who can guarantee me that the binaries don't have those backdoors and trojans.
Take that one step further and read Ken Thompson's masterpiece Reflections on Trusting Trust
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
I am very curious. How do they manage to maintain it ? how much spaghetti the code is ? what is the internal coding style ? what design patterns do they follow ? how componentized really is ? how much is it tied to the 80x86 architecture ? how much does the API resemble the APIs of MacOS ? what pieces are left from the original Windows ? is it only asm and C/C++ or there is Pascal in there is well ? How well does it compare to Linux when it comes to coding techniques ? what versioning system do they use ? how much of it is hacks ?
Of course, this is my scientific interest as a programmer to other people's work, and since Windows is a very important piece of software, I would like to see the internals of it. I don't care of repackaging and selling it, because I already have a working O/S that's fine for me: Linux. And I don't think that the open source Linux would gain anything from the Windows source code...
It would seem that this 'open source' move is an attempt to silence the remaining critics who say that access to the source is more important than the $$$ that MS is throwing at them.
The sad thing is that this isn't comparable to having the Linux source. Very few will have access to it and those that do will only be able to look at it, rather than being able to modify the OS itself and redistribut it.
Basically the only benefit you get is the ability to look for bugs and trojans to make sure that you aren't being spied on. That is certainly reasonable for a government to want to do, but it is only one of the many benefits of true 'open source'.
Lasers Controlled Games!
[By all means correct me if i'm wrong on any of this...]
/. story, or possibly a story somewhere else, quote that the Indian government was embracing Linux because of ability to access some portion of the networking code that they couldn't access in windows because of its closed nature?
Well if i'm not mistaken, didn't an earlier
Appears to be just another Salvo in Operation Vindaloo (tm) (Bills wooing away of Indian developers from non MS projects...or attempt at any rate). First he donates a massive amount of money to fight AIDS while at the same time offering to give away windows (or was that sell at a reduced cost). Now, its sharing source code. Anyone want to place bets on what hes going to do next?
--- I was far from home, and the spell of the Eastern sea was upon me. -Lovecraft-