Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Opens Source to China
angst7 writes "ZDNet is reporting that Microsoft has signed an agreement which would allow the Chinese government access to Windows source code. This is part of an effort to curb the shift toward Linux in China due to that country's concerns regarding the security of closed source software." Reader NZheretic points out that less than a year ago, Jim Allchin swore under oath that disclosing the Windows operating system source code could damage national security.
Now that China has the source code we can look forward to some really nasty ones.
less than a year ago, Jim Allchin swore under oath that disclosing the Windows operating system source code could damage national security.
So, does this open the door for a purjury investigation? I would think that a number of companies would look upon this with great interest.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
It's just that M$ can't go after China with an army of lawyers. When a school or corp breaks their NDA, they end up in court. I wonder what happens when China breaks NDA.
Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
Trade secrets: Beyond a doubt there are piles of things in the source code that could be considered trade secrets. One way to protect trade secrets is to make certain that they are widely available but not legally available. In the cynic's view (i.e. mine) M$ wants the code to be leaked by China.
If the code is illegally leaked, it is very easy for M$ to accuse other products (future Linux apps?) of using illegally acquired trade secrets. How can the authors, living in countries around the world, prove that none of them have ever seen illegally leaked material?
Based on what I have read about the development of the clone of the IBM BIOS, it appears that the burden of proof de facto lies on the defendant to show that they are not using trade secrets illegally.
This may give M$ a very big gun to point at any colloboratively developed code that they don't care for.
Although I've always felt that "cyberwar" scenarios were rather overblown attempts at giving backroom geeks frontline roles, the military certainly takes it seriously; one well-received military paper a few years ago warned that America's IT defenses were on a par with the ability of Task Force Smith (whose ignominious retreat from Korean forces showed how woefully unprepared America was for the Korean conflict).
As we know, China has been touted as the first great cyberwar enemy; allegedly, China does have a "hacker brigade" tasked with disrupting American networks and computer systems in times of war, to rectify the strategic imbalance between the two nations. Now, Microsoft plans to open to a strategic rival of the U.S. the internal code that will power the Navy's upcoming CVN-77 aircraft carrier, plus other "smart ships."
This raises an interesting question for the Administration: although, as Vann H. Van Diepen (Director of the Office of Chemical, Biological, and Missile Nonproliferation) told Congress, export controls to China are not enforced in "areas where the technology is widely available as commodity items ... such as low-level computers," the source code to a mission-critical operating system used by military C4 systems is certainly not a "commodity item," nor is it "widely available." Will the White House put national security over Microsoft's profits? Les Kinsolving, call your office!
"Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."
You missed the original poster's point. He was asking what happens if China gets the source, but cannot verify that the binaries that they were given (e.g. the shrink-wrapped version) is based on this source-code or something else (e.g. this with some special calls to MSNSAWeakenSSLKeySpace(true)).
Ultimately, if China cannot reproduce the binaries from the source, they will probably have to dismiss this as a marketting stunt.
Actually some versions of code red did have code to detect the language that a site's web pages were in and trashed the site if it wasn't in Chineese. Then a few days after this was discovered a second verison of the same worm appeared which did the opposite. Code Red hit at the time that the US spy plane was forced down in China.
There are plenty of examples of politically motivated hacking, the Palestinians and Israelis have been having an ongoing proxy war for some time. However almost all the events appear to be the work of independent agents working on their own rather than being coordinated cyber-warfare.
The only example of state sponsored cyberwarfare I am aware of is the attacks on Usenet by Hasan B-) Mutlu and Serdar Argic who roboposted thousands of anti-armenian propaganda messages. Mutlu and Argic were both pseudonyms used by an officer of thr turkish intelligence service which was concerned that reports on the Turkish massacre of Armenians during world war I were circulating on Usenet and damaging the image of Turkey abroad at a time when the post USSR CIS was fragmenting into racial warfare. So they roboposted claims of a bogus masacre of turks by armenians repeatedly in order to drown out and discredit the genuine claims that the turks massacred the armenians.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I tried to write something that was quick to read, but to the point. Who knows, maybe someone will notice. I'm not holding my breath, though.
=====
Despite the fact that Microsoft's software is widely known to contain many security vulnerabilities, the U.S. government and military heavily rely on Microsoft's Windows operating system to peform vital government functions.
It is relatively easy to find security vulnerabilities in software when you have access to the source code of that software (source code is what defines software; people read and write source code).
In light of this fact, Microsoft has claimed that sharing information about its software with competitors could damage national security.
More important than any competitor to Microsoft, China now has the source code to Microsoft's Windows operating system.
Shouldn't the U.S. government move in the direction of open software that is not ultimately controlled by any one entity? As a concerned and informed citizen, I would wholeheartedly suggest Senator Warner support open source software and vote against bills like the DMCA that stifle the progress of open source software.
I understand that China is not allowed to compile the program. That being the case how can they be sure that they have the complete source.
The only way that I can see a government feeling warm and fuzzy about this would be if they were allowed to examine all 500 million lines of code and to compile it themselves and distribute that.
Even doing this they will have to do the same thing to every update and every proprietary piece of software that they run on government computers.
I think that Linux is still the way to go for China.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
My question is, what happens if they violate this agreement? I mean what could MS possibly do the Chinese government is they (China) decides to modify, redistribute, or simply publish it? Are they (MS) gonna file lawsuits, pursuade the US to go after them, what? An American corp has essentually zero scare power when it comes to a foreign nation.
From an Infoworld article [infoworld.com] on the subject:
"Governments signing up to the security program will be able to build systems that offer the high levels of security required for national security, Microsoft has said. However, government users will not be allowed to make modifications to the code or compile the source code into Windows programs themselves, according to Microsoft."
Yeah, real 'open'.
Hmmm - So MS took their windows source, compiled it, modified the code to remove the backdoors, and sent it to China. To ensure that China aren't then going to modify the source, they make sure the source is not buildable - Have in the agreement that they don't give China some important part of the building process.
So China search through the code, find no backdoors (because they have been removed), but runs the original version of the code with the backdoors still in it, because they are not able to build fresh sources.
Seems like a good deal to me.