Slashdot Mirror
Tux Enlisted for U.S. Defense Program
An anonymous reader writes "Linux is a key part of the Army's massive $200B FCS (Future Computing System) initiative, it seems. RTOS vendor LynuxWorks was chosen to provide the OS for 18 weapons platforms under development, because its LynxOS-178 real-time OS can run Linux binaries -- including the "common operating environment" that Boeing is developing for FCS."
As far as I know, the Royal Navy is still considering NT for the Type 45 - maybe this will help to change their mind.
...this paper talks about using the open source, BSD-licensed agent framework COUGAAR to run FCS modeling tests.
Also, there's a bunch of COUGAAR support software written in Ruby, i.e., ACME.
The Army reading list
It will be. Then in comes SCO and takes the credit
Scully: Should we arrest David Copperfield?
Mulder: Yes we should, but not for this.
Nothing says "feel-good bluegrass tech movement" like becoming part of the military industrial complex.
- Rory [Microsoft Employee] | Free dirt: neopoleon.com
Uniform of the Day is now a Tuxedo.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
of a penguin with a cigarette hanging out of the side of its mouth, cradling an assault rifle and wearing a helmet with 'Born to kill' written on it.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
That is all.
Colonel Panic: Not just a reaction to incorrect artillery coordinates anymore!
Do you like German cars?
Apparently not. The press release states that they provide ABI compatiblity using special shared libraries ("[...] compatibility is implemented through the use of dynamically linked shared libraries[...]", similar to WINE). Maybe they have ported GNU libc to LynxOS and use some free software. But apparently, no Linux kernel code is involved.
At that price, supporting free software is a mixed bargain if I ever heard of one. Note that it supports Linux binaries, but it is not Linux as we know it.
Soli Deo Gloria
murder is just a legal term for killing not sanctioned by the government, so no murders will be done. Maybe some genocide and assassinations and such, but no murder.
The Tuxinator; he'll never stop EVER, until you are dead!
You're shooting for the Funny mod, but think about it.
- The precursor to the web we're both using right now was pentagon (ARPA) funded.
http://request-header.info
Since Linux isn't actually involved in this project in any way, shouldn't the summary state that GNU is a key part of the FCS initiative?
Tux is actually sitting this one out.
Under the GPL I don't think they'd have to submit anything back unless they distributed it publically anyway.
Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
While we all know that Windows is easily subjugated by trojans and viruses, and with the penetration of windows system on the market and connected to the Internet, it's a real problem. Some attribute this to the Windows mono-culture.
Isn't this just another mono-culture waiting to be exploited? Consider the risk. One trojan or virus with a trojan let lose in the military network, and there is no telling what it would / could do. All of a sudden, zillions of fake targets are buzzing around the UCAV's radar as it starts shooting mindlessly at them.
Granted, this assumes, and it's probably a big assumption, that one could connect to the military network in a clandestine nature and remain hidden. But is the risk worth the mono-culture savings?
No more so than cars, truck, aluminum, steel, or coffee is. All of which is used by the military around the world, for good or evil.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
expect a sharp ramp up in anti Linux/FOSS lobbying from Microsoft via supposedly worried parties... all worried about the US's defence being trusted to a "commie OS" written by "hacker"s and other "hippy" malcontents...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Freedom can be a real bitch when *your* agenda is trodden upon.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
If they'd put Windows on it, you've have bitched and jumped up and down.
They put Linux on it, and you're still wining.
Perhaps the world doesn't actually give a stuff of the opinions of a load of geeks in their bedrooms?
We already have military equipment running Windows. And this article isn't even about using the Linux kernel or a Linux distro, just an API on top of LynxOS. So what you said could be said about the military's use of any operating system x, what if someone develops a virus/trojan/exploit on x?
Hmmm Tux joins the military.
;)
All the hippy hacker types will be fuming. They might even have to get their hair cur
Philip
Signatures are broken
No, it's a real-time OS that can run Linux binaries. Linux isn't really a real-time OS, although there's been a lot of hackery recently to change this.
LynxOS is older than Linux. Development on LynxOS began in Dallas, TX in early 1986. The system was built for the 68000 architecture originally, targetting a custom-built 68010 VME bus CPU. The software was compiled with the C compiler sold by Megamax for the Macintosh. LynxOS was ported to the IA86 for the 386 in 1988-1989. The LynxOS ABI compatibility history goes back to about 1989 also, when SVR3 compatibility was added to the system. No UNIX or (of course) Linux code was used in the development of the OS.
FCS is getting scaled back because of the extreme cost.
1 18-2005Mar14.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Well, BSODs are pretty much a thing of the past, at least unless you have a defective hardware.
That said, when Windows is used where formerly an embedded OS is used, there is a tendency not to do a very good job stripping out all the stuff that's not needed. Since you aren't going to be patching things that much in the field, this could lead to known security holes on deployed systems for a long time. It may not matter, indeed usually the excuse is that it won't matter, but sometimes the unforseen happens. It's not unheard of for "embedded" versions of windows to have problems like windows file sharing turned on. The hardware engineers don't think like sysadmins.
This problem is not intrinsic to Windows; I've seen the same thing recently on a box that controlled an under vehicle scanner. It used stock SUSE with an old verison of BIND and samba, trhe3 works. The customer wanted to connect it via wireless to a central guard station. This was a bad idea. The security holes in the box are harmless as long as it is stand alone, but on a network they are huge liabilities.
At least with Linux, you can go the Linux from scratch route, which minimizes you exposure to security holes in ancient software.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
It's just not well publicized. Often because the department using it doesn't want any publicity. But Linux was highly visible at FOSE lats week.
Best Slashdot Co
contributed back to the community
To the extent that the government is using non-proprietary OSes and and other cheaper/free pieces of infrastructure to conduct critical activities (like defense, or emergency response), we're looking at using up fewer tax dollars, and that's plenty of "giving back." Of course, the defense/intel community does very much distribute enhanced goodies where it can, and we've had plenty of conversations here about things like open source CAD stuff from the Navy.
Probably the most important thing, though, is that you get thousands of federal techies using different systems, and a lot of them will leave their stint with the DOD and head out into the wild with an appreciation for alternate ways to handle IT problems. Those folks, showing up at private sector HR desks looking for more lucrative jobs, will have more to do with corporate acceptance of things like Linux than any amount of code the feds might publish.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I disagree. Security through obscurity has been proved not to work time and time again. Granted it may perhaps buy you a little time, but in the long run it won't work.
Crappy application not fully tested (and they knew that and accepted the risks) didn't know how to handle an improper user input. A zero went into the database. The app couldn't handle the DIV0, and crashed.
The Navy report concluded it was the application and human error, and not NT.
Thank goodness Slashdot doesn't have an icon for Liunx in the military. Knowing Taco, it would probably be Tux wearing an adorable little camoflage outfit, in the same vein as the Tux wearing a suit icon.
Adorable.
Taco, about that Tux in a suit icon as a symbol for Linux in the business realm, Tux himself would not be wearing the suit. He's already got a tuxedo, for chrissakes. It would be the suits who were USING Linux. Linux/Tux himself would not be the one changing himself to suit the situation, it would be the suits.
Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
LynxOS is not Linux. It's a completely different, and much smaller, kernel. It's not as minimal as QNX; LynxOS has drivers in the kernel. But it's far smaller than Linux. It's small enough to get through the expensive and difficult examination process required for avionics.
Confusingly, the company that sells LynxOS recently changed their name to LynuxWorks, and also distributes BlueCat Linux, an embedded Linux distro based on the 2.6 Linux kernel. LynuxWorks had a huge booth at the Embedded Systems Conference last month.
LynxOS, BlueCat Linux, and QNX all use the GNU compilers and tools. All are POSIX compatible, and will run most commmand line programs with a recompile.
Well, linux implements division by zero. So there.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
BSODs are pretty much a thing of the past...
;o)
On the other hand, I agree with everything else you said.
I suppose these are why you chose "pretty much," huh?
Hi all,
o s-02-17-05.asp
Lynxworks can say whatever they want, but the Army isn't picking an OS until 2006. See this link: http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2005/0214/web-fcs
Here is one quote that may be interesting:
"Cartwright and Muilenberg downplayed rumors that they decided not to use Microsoft's Windows operating system in FCS because of security issues. The officials said they have made no such decision to date."
In a letter to the "Comment and Discussion" department, published in the Aug 98 _Naval_Institute_Proceedings_, page 22, Captain Richard T. Rushton, then-CO of _Yorktown_, categorically states, "The _Yorktown_ was never towed as a result of any Smart Ship initiative. During my command, we lost propulsion power twice while using the new technology. Each time, we knew what caused the interrupt and were underway again in about 30 minutes. The September 1997 incident was caused by incorrect data insertion by a well-trained crewman. The _Yorktown_ returned to port using two FFG-7 emergency control units that specifically had been requested by me, and supported by other commands as a risk reducer. We knew there were some risks in the engineering development model propulsion-control system installed under a rapid prototyping development effort. The bottom line: The data field safeguards found in production-level systems were not installed yet in the _Yorktown_ by intention, until complete wring-out was accomplished."
Further: ... She went on to execute a five-month Caribbean deployment that included extensive Smart Ship assessments by the Operational Test and Evaluation Force and Navy Manpower Analysis Center. Both organizations evaluated the _Yorktown_ as fully capable in meeting the required operational capabilities in a projected operating environment. ..."
"The _Yorktown_ never missed an operational commitment, nor did she suffer a mission-degrading casualty during the Smart Ship assessment period. During that time she certified to deploy under the normal fleet training and assessment process.
Not really, I work for ESA and most of the contracts for development have clauses in them that state that all the products 'belong', 'are property of' the organization, and not the subcontractor.
This is legally fine, because if you can hire an 'employee' and have him write some code for you, you retain all rights to that code. It would be silly if you lost it because you hire an employee to write code for you.
Nothing unusual.
But the changes the contractor made would have to be made public under the GPL because they distributed it to the military. If the military decided that they didn't want the changes to be revealed, you're back to the same conflict.
No. The GPL only requires you to give source to your customers if they ask for it. Making it avaiable to anyone via the web is not required, it is just a convenient way to implement the preceeding for some. Subcontractor give source to Boeing and Boeing gives source to Pentagon, public never sees it, and no GPL violation has occurred.
You fit a missile with a Linux kernel. Does this mean that every time you distribute the software by nuking someone you have to drop a copy of the source code in the crater afterwards :)?
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
The Tuxinator; he'll never stop EVER, until you are dead!
Or his time_t overflows, whichever comes soonest.
Hmm, in a way I have to agree with that as well. Now that I think about it, I think it doesnt matter what OS that runs your weapons, war will never leave any winners, both sides will lose Someones been playing a lot of tic-tac-toe!
Fact of life: There are precious few tools that cannot be utilized as a weapon.
Welcome to the world.
Regards;
Only a really topheavy organization can make this kind of mistake.
The compatibility ABI isn't going to pass muster when it hits the QA phase, they never do. You can't realistically develop an application for one OS and expect it to work perfectly on a "compatible" OS.
When developing vertical applications like this, it's most wise to develop for the actual physical installation that it's going to end up running on. Not just the *version, the actual functioning OS image that will ultimately be used.
There's a term for what this is gonna end up being. The first part is cluster and the last part rhymes with truck.
This is just like television, only you can see much further.
Hey, just wanted to make a few things clear, from the perspective of someone who works on this stuff (military research in general, FCS in particular). There are three basic networks that we use here, and I'm hoping I can provide a bit of detail on each:
The most widely-used is the NIPRNet, which is the network that most business operations on the base use. All machines connected to it must conform to a standard Windows image, and the network is monitored and internet access moderately restricted (i.e. gaming sites, porn sites, "mp3 sites", direct ip connections, etc. are blocked). Software on these machines must undergo a lengthy approval process before being loaded by a qualified WGM (basically, your workgroup's local tech person with admin access to the machines). Most resident contractors are put on this network, with a few exceptions.
Next, we have the SIPRNet. This is the secure network, and is rigidly monitored and the machines accessing it are restricted to only the things deemed essential for the classified project. SIPRNet machines must be isolated both physically and electronically from any other computers on the base and from the intranet/internet.
Finally, we have the DREN. This is the "research" network, and is where people like me get things done. Internet access is unrestricted, and software is loosly, if at all, controlled (basically, if you're not causing alarms to go off in the network guy's building, you're ok...just don't go using it for Bittorrent or the like). Individuals have full control of their computers, and can install and run their own programs (including, as in my case, Linux). A firewall still blocks most ports to the outside world, but 80 and 21 are open (I am forced to ssh to my home box through port 80, however, and CVS isn't an option in most cases). The research supercomputers are on this network, and a kerberos authentication scheme is used for access. Frankly, this is the only machine I can get anything resembling real work done on, but we're all forced to have a separate NIPRNet box for e-mail, active directory stuff, and the like. If their work demands it, contractors may, in certain cases, have access to this network. It is not reachable at all from the outside except through kerberized ssh and ftp.
Hope this settles a few things. I know there's distinctions on different levels that I'm not aware of and/or not allowed to know, but that's how things generally look from a DoD-employed researcher's perspective.