OpenBSD Lands $2 Million In DARPA Money

An anonymous reader writes "Canada's National Post is reporting today that DARPA is (indirectly) funding $2-million (US) to Theo de Raadt of OpenBSD. The article is available here." Update: 04/07 21:01 GMT by T : As several readers have pointed out, this blurb should credit instead The Globe and Mail rather than the National Post.

Comments

Don't look a gift grant in the mouth

[dtolton]

I don't understand why getting money from DARPA makes them uncomfortable. He mentions it comes with no strings attached.

Shouldn't we be happy about grants like this that will promote and advance Open Source software in general?

Re:Don't look a gift grant in the mouth

[nucal]

Actually, I think that he was just using this as an excuse to publicize his opinions about the war:

The DARPA grant enabled Mr. de Raadt to add the equivalent of four full-time developers to supplement the work of about 80 volunteers. And although he's happy about the extra support for the project, he's nervous that critics may get the idea he's working for the U.S. military.

"We're not doing anything for them. They just fund us to do what we do," said Mr. de Raadt, a 35-year-old graduate of the University of Calgary's computer science program. Mr. de Raadt is no fan of the U.S. military at the moment. He calls the war in Iraq an oil grab. "It just sickens me."

Re:Don't look a gift grant in the mouth

[47PHA60]

Mr. DeRaadt thinks software should be secure, and that people should be free. He is now being funded in part by DARPA, which is also designing the Total Information Awareness project. Its main platform will probably be OpenBSD. A lot of free software is used for purposes that the original authors might not like.

So why not question the source of a gift? That shows intelligence, thoughtfulness, and awareness of the effects of one's actions on the wider world.

I agree that we should be happy for the promotion and improvement of free software, but it is smart of anyone, no matter his or her politics, to keep an eye on the big picture to make sure that one does not explicitly take money to promote an agenda that is abhorrent to his or her morals.

Re:Don't look a gift grant in the mouth

[leery]

Sometimes it twists the other way, too, like the internet becoming a public conduit for slashdotters all over the world to trash the agency that funded it's development (DARPA). The interstate highway system was also DoD funded.

And sometimes the military takes advantage of privately developed technology and adapts it to improve weapons systems and training (e.g. PC's, laptops, war sims).

Look, as long as military money is going somewhere, isn't it a thousand million times better that it goes to an open source free software project than to a more lethal bullet or some TIA code that no one can ever see?

(Can any lawyers here tell us whether military use of OpenBSD would be bound by GPL? Is our next tank's source code going to be available for download?)

Also, I'm pretty sure the military didn't conceive or order this "oil grab". They're just stuck doing the dirty work. I'm not saying that makes them the good guys or the bad guys, but they're not THOSE bad guys.

Re:Don't look a gift grant in the mouth

[Dan Ost]

Can any lawyers here tell us whether military
use of OpenBSD would be bound by GPL? Is our next
tank's source code going to be available for
download?

OpenBSD isn't GPL. Therefore, there's no reason
to believe that any modifications done to it
by the military would be GPL.

Re:Why open source works

[Lxy]

Why is this news?

$2 million is news. That's a lot of money to be out into open source.

Re:$2 million? For a Dead OS?

[4of12]

1. Posses huge, pain-in-the-ass ego.

Alas, this happens.

Highly talented and intelligent people get exasperated with us mortals and let us know in no uncertain terms that we are stupid. I knew someone in school like this once. He would put pointed questions out that would show people's stupidity in broad daylight. But he was so intelligent, and I had enough intelligence still left, to know when he was right.

True intelligence is being able to recognize someone more intelligent than you are and to be able to support their work even if they have a grating personality.

Don't ever make the mistake of putting them in a role of managing people, though.

Crypto is good. Crypto is evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

from the openbsd website:

"Today cryptography is an important means for enhancing the security of an operating system...

'...When we create OpenBSD releases or snapshots we build our release binaries in free countries to assure that the sources and binaries we provide to users are free of tainting. In the past our release binary builds have been done in Canada, Sweden, and Germany...'

Gov spends millions to control crypto exports.

Gov spends millions to support OpenBSD which
bypasses US crypto export laws?!

Re:hOMeland Security/Patriot Act WORKING!

[gpinzone]

Author Steven Brill is experiencing total friction among his close circle of elitist liberal media associates after releasing a book which claims: Homeland Security under President Bush is working!

And why have there been no fresh terror strikes in the United States since the start of the war?

Coincidentally, I have a rock that keeps away tigers. I know it works because I don't see any tigers.

it depends on whether it makes a difference

[Trepidity]

If he were taking money to implement DARPA-requested features, I could see the issue. However, if all he's doing is taking no-strings-attached money to do work he'd be doing anyway, I don't see the moral conundrum. If there are any negative effects of his work (OpenBSD being used by TIA, for example), they'd exist even if he wasn't funded by DARPA; the only solution would be to stop developing OpenBSD entirely, not to keep doing it without DARPA funding. So insofar as DARPA funding doesn't change anything, I'd say take it. Plus, at least it ensures that this portion of DARPA's budget goes to something worthwhile and unobjectionable, rather than letting them keep it to spend on something else.

Re:it depends on whether it makes a difference

[drinkypoo]

DARPA is a portion of the US Government which spends money on development of technologies which are useful to the military. The military uses these technologies to further its goals. Arguably, certain actions of the US Government are, if not evil, at least less than honorable.

With all that said; OpenBSD is free software in all senses of the word. They can and will use it anyway. Might as well take their money.

Acorns grow to be oaks.

[GerardM]

Consider the cost involved. Compare it to some military hardware. Given how and where it can be used given its license, it will be used all over and will save lives as much as a pantzer does.

The brilliant thing here is that this move recognises the importance of communities; the OpenBSD community IS all over the world, with Mr de Raadt a Canadian the work can be done in Canada, in the USA, in India, wherever the TALENT is.

As the grant is intended to help "testing the security of commercial software systems against the security of open source software projects", it will point to the truth in this old dispute what makes better secure software AND it will help to point to the relative merits of "security by obscurity".

However to assess this, I expect DARPA not to select Microsoft Windows as the champion of the proprietary world, I would choose OS/400. Given the smaller size of the OpenBSD community, the effect of methodology can be better assessed.

As DARPA throws bread on the water, I hope they will land a big fish!

Thanks, Gerard

Re:Can you say, "Hypocrite?"

[Night Goat]

The U.S. Government is a huge organization that sponsors all sorts of programs. DARPA didn't cause the war. NASA didn't cause the war. The IRS didn't cause the war. Like Theo said, taking the money prevented that money from being used on a cruise missile.