Slashdot Mirror
Schwartz Comments On NSA/Sun OpenSolaris Collaboration
sean_nestor writes to mention that Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz took a bit of time recently to comment on last week's announcement that Sun Microsystems would be partnering closely with the NSA for security research surrounding OpenSolaris. Rather than the typical loads of legalese and confidentiality agreements Sun and the NSA are claiming that this move is more about the NSA joining the OpenSolaris community than anything else. I guess only time will tell.
"Open" is the keyword here. It's not like they are going to be submitting binary patches or that we can't review the source code they submit.
I'd also like to point out the SELinux project, will you abandon Linux now too?
You should really adjust that tin foil, it's messing with the signals that are already inside your head.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
From the article, "MAC's exists so that not just anyone, for example, can look at your passport file without permission..." Whaaaa?? Isn't that what just happened to the presidential candidates?
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
It takes me forever to pull out SELinux when I deploy a new Linux server and now I have to worry about what the hell OpenSolaris is doing instead of running an application or whatever its purpose is supposed to be doing.
Doesn't anyone else see MAJOR privacy and 4th amendment violations when government and business get into bed with each other?!?! I do not want any agency in the US government helping Sun, Microsoft, and or anyone else with "securing" their products. There is only one reason why the NSA is interested in OpenSolaris and it has nothing to do with "securing" it.
Please learn about and help support efforts for Radical Transparency!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_transparency
E-democracy is a good start:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-democracy
Though the Metagovernment is probably the best solution possible:
http://www.metagovernment.org/
Then there would be no NSA: who needs national security when there are no nations?
Helping a Vole out of a hole
By Nick Farrell: Tuesday, 09 January 2007, 2:26 PM
THE USA GOVERNMENT'S cryptologic organisation, the National Security Agency, has admitted that it is behind some of the security changes to Microsoft's operating system Vista.
According to the Washington Post, the agency which was once so secret that it was jokingly referred to as 'No such Agency' has admitted making 'unspecified contributions' to Vista.
Tony Sager, the NSA's chief of vulnerability analysis and operations group, told the Post that it was the agency's intention to help everyone these days.
The NSA used a red and a blue team to pull apart the software. The red team posed as "the determined, technically competent adversary" to disrupt, corrupt or steal information. The Blue team helped Defense Department system administrators with Vista's configuration.
Vole said that it has sought help from the NSA over the last four years. Apparently its skills can be seen in the Windows XP consumer version and the Windows Server 2003 for corporate customers.
The assistance is at the US taxpayers' expense, although the NSA says it all makes perfect sense. Not only is the NSA protecting United States business, its own Defense Department uses VoleWare so it is in the government's interest to make sure it is as secure as possible.
Microsoft is not the only one to tap the spooks. Apple, with its Mac OSX operating system, and Novell with its SUSE Linux also asked the NSA what it thought of their products. The NSA is quite good at finding weapons of mass destruction that are not there.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
If you read between the lines, and know anything about SELinux (also orginating inside the NSA), you come away with the impression that this is SELinux ported to OpenSolaris. Since the code will be as open as the rest of the OpenSolaris code, it doesn't sound like that big a deal to me ...
I wonder if they'll actually use the word "backdoor" in the comments to the code they contribute, or is there a more fashionable word nowadays ?
Nullius in verba
With Linux don't you have the source? So how can your 4th amendment rights and privacy be violated when you can just remove the stuff? Maybe the businesses are trying to make money and the government has deep pockets so they secure their software so the government will spend money on their products. It is just capitalism at work. The world is full of smart people, I am sure the NSA can not slip some nice little "feature" into an operating system and someone will not find it. Maybe just maybe the NSA is trying to make sure their shit is secure...your privacy is just fine. If you do not think so why don't you analyze it and report to slashdot how the NSA has inserted code that violates your rights. We all would love to know.
I smoked pot once. But I DID NOT inhale. Will you hire me?
Whatever happened to the project embedding a Solaris kernel inside a Debian/GNU OS? Would the current version of that OS work properly with this FMAC and the TrustedExtensions to run "Linux" apps on a much more secure OS?
--
make install -not war
Nice troll.
Spoken like a true Sheep. It takes teams of people to understand the ins and outs of large sums of source code, especially for Linux and probably more so for Windows. I have hacked the kernel and made changes but I do not understand the entire thing, not one person could build an OS like Linux and deploy it without community support.
Microsoft makes its employees sign NDA's so if extra "features" get added to Windows, no one is going to know about them unless it gets leaked out. The government spooks coding some of Vista likely explains the problems people are having with it.
The last thing that is in the best interests of ANYONE is any agency of the US government making sure any of the OS's being deployed are "secure" for us to use. If they want a secure OS for their needs...fine, then make one or contract to have one made! I have no interest in using it.
The government is like a sexually transmitted disease, easy to catch and hard as hell to get rid of.
Shhh... they're monitoring this...
Geeze - that's the point of OpenSolaris - open source code for us to look at... oh that's right you don't look at/understand the code. Whaaa... Microsoft keeps their code closed source... whaaa... doesn't matter when nobody looks into the source of the open source stuff does it?
Are you sure the tin foil hat you're wearing isn't just a tuned cavity that they designed so that they can monitor your thoughts?
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Not necessarily. Without government and business "in bed with each other" - even ignoring the basic impossibility of avoiding that in the real world, unless the government has its entire separate economy, industrial base, telecom system... which sounds much scarier than current reality - there would be no Internet, no computers. The government was the customer that paid businesses to invent, produce and operate those essential innovations at every step. If the government somehow did have its own parallel universe in which only government was making those things for government use, they'd never have been available to the general public, except perhaps as some purely socialized system, like borrowing "the official standard model" from a local public library or something. Which would never work, and we'd still be back in the 1960s now, telecom wise. Like the Soviet Union was.
No, actually, the NSA has more jobs and interests than just the illegal spying they also do (and which should be stopped). It's always good to be paranoid about the government - it's the most American impulse of all - but that doesn't mean we should stop our NSA from improving security whenever it can - which is all that it's supposed to do. Projects like OpenSolaris are open, so the entire public can look at what the NSA has brought to it before deciding to use it. And that includes foreign governments and others with conflicting interests with the NSA, so "official cooperation" doesn't have to keep silent actual security criticisms from other parties not "in bed" with the NSA.
In fact, the NSA spends a lot of our money (and time of the limited amount we can direct our government to spend) securing telecom often operated on less secure systems. So the NSA improving OpenSolaris means the NSA has less work in reacting to telecom crises, because it has helped prevent them. And of course putting the science and engineering that the public pays the NSA to produce into a produce anyone can use means the public is getting more (and more immediate) ROI from what we're spending on the NSA.
And then there's the advantage of getting the NSA invested in openness. After the last decade or so of extreme and always increasing secrecy in the Federal government, especially surrounding NSA "projects", getting the NSA to work more in public, more with the public, is an important organizational reform. Which will also be part of the long road repairing our ruined relationship with foreign intel services we need as allies. All of which can use a common platform that keeps the minimum secrecy for both good engineering and more trustworthy human relationships.
So it's good to see the NSA going for OpenSolaris. It doesn't hurt to be paranoid, but you have to be realistic about what is actually going to be produced, and its actual costs, risks and benefits - compared to the real alternatives. That's security in a nutshell.
--
make install -not war
To put it into geek-speak, "We could tell you, but then we'd have to reiserize you."
Kevin Smith on Prince
On the NSA side, having many eyes analyzing their code has both risks -- if holes are found in their security model or implementations, potentially these could be exploited by the blackhat types and benefits -- more weaknesses discovered faster and holes plugged so that the blackhat types get closed out of NSA type stuff faster than they can do it with closed implementations.
But neither of these scenarios will let NSA somehow increase their "big brother reach" because with many eyes comes near perfect scrutiny that would quickly out any code back-doors, etc. that would be usable by the white hats or the black hats.
On the whole I find this to be a cool/worthwhile endeavor on Sun's part and look forward to it's efforts being leveraged into all of the Open Source stuff that can use it.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
All this collaboration will do is create 5% really good gems, and 95% throw away code--and it will take 4yrs to see any result knowing how fast both organization move.
I like openSolaris, but I unless Nexenta gets it butt in gear, Linux will win hands down on the usability front.
I suspect what really is going on is that the NSA doesn't trust closed Microsoft code and wants to make sure there are secure open source operating systems they can use (they may get access to the MS codebase, but I doubt they'd be able to set up their own secure repository and verified build).
Remember, sane people mistrust the NSA. Paranoid people work for the NSA.
Somehow, I don't think this NSA collaboration with Sun on Solaris' essential embedded security tech consisted of just registering a username/password at Sun.com and sending Bill Vass an email.
--
make install -not war
One of the NSA's directives is for helping provide security for the rest of the gov, as a bit of an expert group. Securing OSs for gov use falls in that category.
Your NSA friends can probably tell you they're working for the NSA. They just can't say doing what.
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
and it has been around for years: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/security/projects/tx/
Sun sells a lot of equipment to the US government. Anyone who has dealt with adding a new system to a classified network understands the amount of extensive documentation and accreditation that is required before IATO. Hopefully, NSA's contributions to improving Solaris security will pay dividends in reducing this.
Spoken like a conspiracy theory nut. Distrust of the government is a very good thing. Blindingly thinking the government is out to get you is as stupid as blindingly believing it's out to help you. In this case, SELinux is completely open and out there for you to see.
It takes teams of people to understand the ins and outs of large sums of source codeDo you think teams of people haven't gone through the SELinux code with a fine-tooth comb? Security researchers were all over that, when the code was first given to the community in 2000. It wasn't placed in the mainline kernel until 2003. There has been plenty of time for people to find echelon-type code in there. Not to mention it would be pretty stupid to put that type of code in the open, as it would destroy people's confidence in the NSA and allow people who looked at the code to use these hooks for their own benefits, thus potentially using it against the US Government itself, since several departments including the DoD and the NSA itself use it.
I have hacked the kernel and made changes but I do not understand the entire thing, not one person could build an OS like Linux and deploy it without community support.No, but I guarantee you that if you submitted your kernel changes to the mainline tree, several people above you looked at those changes and vetted it as worthwhile for inclusion. And you can bet every one of those people don't understand the entire kernel, but sure as hell understood the part of the kernel you were messing with. And they understood what your code was doing. Anyone can make changes to the linux code, but it's not an open source repository that everyone submits to, there are specific processes to get things accepted to the main tree.
The government is like a sexually transmitted disease, easy to catch and hard as hell to get rid of.The solution to sexually transmitted diseases is to be vigilant and careful, not to stop having sex. If all humans become so afraid of sexually transmitted diseases that they quit having children humanity would be gone. Similar fate would befall you in total anarchism. Be wary of your government, and require it to be open. Please don't bitch about the good and open things the government has done, we need to encourage more of that.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
Spoken like a true delusional. Look, this is the NSA. They're pretty smart folks
Smart, and RAND Corporation kind of evil. You can't use evil people, keep an eye on them and end up getting good returns. It's a delusion. If you let evil people be involved in your enterprises, they will fuck them up, and you as well. Most people need to learn this the hard way.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
> you can literally stare at the source code and audit it.
What good does that do if the gcc binary has been modified to insert nasty code when it compiles. All of the source code could be clean, including the source code of gcc. Then anything that gets compiled has backdoors inserted.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
The NSA is a huge organization, does a lot of different things, and as a result, it can--like a lot of large companies and agencies--seem a bit schizophrenic.
NSA employees have made significant contributions to Linux already, and there have been the usual arguments over design choices that any such project faces, but there's never been the smallest suggestion of any subterfuge.
OpenSolaris's work is conducted in the light of day, and I doubt the NSA's participation will be any more nefarious there.
Part of the NSA's mandate seems to be to improve the security of everybody's operating systems. That's work that can benefit all of us, is exactly the sort of work that a "national security agency" *should* do, and we should encourage it, while still condemning the projects we disapprove of.
On the contrary, this is exactly what I believe the "National Security Agency" should be doing. They should be using their vast economic and intellectual resources to help the people. Currently my tax dollars pay for a huge amount of internal research, just so they can use the knowledge against perceived enemies should the need arise.
The resources that they spend on static analysis and cryptanalysis should be put to work making the nation more secure. By locking up information, they are making everyone less secure. I am sure they will realize this in time, but I hope it is sooner rather than later.
The NSA's primary objective is to keep America safe from foreign spying and other signals manipulation. In the post-cold-war era, that means protection from corporate espionage, and part of that means giving businesses and individuals the tools to protect themselves, via strong encryption, SELinux, and other computational contributions. Don't tell me you pull out anything AES-based from your servers, too.
This isn't about spying on you, it's about preventing Airbus (or the French government on its behalf) from spying on Boeing, for example.
All your (data)base belong to us
1. The NSA wouldn't announce that they are trying to make Linux more secure and then slip in back doors. Heck they submit there patches for all the world to see. If they tried it the finger would point right back at them. And don't you think that everybody and their dog will look at the NSA patches just to check them for such a stupid move?
2. If the NSA wanted to pull something like that they would simply create a person and start adding code that ISN"T under their name!
Hate to tell you but this Internet thingy you are using was created in large part by the government spooks that you fear so much.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
they could infiltrate any open source project, and submit their backdoor-code. if discovered, it would look like some unintentional coding mistake... (and I think they are already doing it) no need for official partnerships of this kind to dothe dirty job...
You are right...distrust of the government is a good thing and I never said the government was out to get me. I said I did not trust SELinux and have a less of a good feeling now the NSA is meddling with OpenSolaris. So how does that make me a conspiracy nut? And why are you so happy with SELinux?
If you want to me respect your opinions instead of me thinking you are some neocon jackass on some government payroll, why not instead of calling me names, perhaps share your SELinux knowledge? Why is it good? Does it benefit your organization? What kind of experience do you have with it. Doc Ruby had some very good intelligent points I counter and I enjoy that kind of debate.
You on the other hand are a fucktard, and is everyone else who pulled the "conspiracy theory" shit on me as a response. I noticed I got a score of "5". I guess the moderators thought I had something worth saying. HMMMM....
Since when does ANYONE trust the government, especially as of late. Anyone who has been here for any length of time knows the kind of comments I post and I typically do not post unless I have something constructive to bring to the forum.
This has strong implications on physics. Suppose time does tell, then the NSA decides to 'disappear' time. What then? Huh?
Since veryone has them tin foil hats on... I think it isn't to modify the OS to monitor people, it is to infiltrate the open source community. Remember that they see the internet as a threat and a place for extended warfare. If that is truely the case you need only to have read the art of war to understand what they are trying to do and how they are trying to position themselves.
OH! Almost forgot! Do you know what the number one call is to Red Hat Support?
...DISABLING SELinux.
The 4th amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Please tell me how NSA code contributions to a project involve any form of "searches and seizures", much less "unreasonable" ones. Or alternatively, show me how this is a warrant issuing without probable cause.... I'm not holding my breath waiting for anything approaching an intelligent answer.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
I will submit patches to everything you post. You'll never notice, you don't read what you post do you? If I submit a 'patch' it is seen by a lot of people. But then again we're all out to get you. EVERYONE
That's what I have done on my Fedora 8 machine. It's actually kind of nice. SELinux will let you know when you've done a system change but without stopping you. That way you know if something has changed (that you yourself didn't do). I guess I'm not geek enough to trail through the log files ;)
Sidenote: why doesn't slashdot allow underlines? I wanted them instead of bold!
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
[quote]It takes me forever to pull out SELinux when I deploy a new Linux server[/quote]
Why not use a distro that doesn't use it by default? Or do all distros use it by default? Serious question.
No sig for you!!
A MAC implementation in OpenSolaris would be great, but doesn't Sun already have Trusted Solaris, which the NSA has been using for years?
I'll be the first to yell out at things like warrantless wiretapping, but believe it or not, even at NSA they use Windows and Linux/Unix on their hardware. It's in their best interest and the interest of their mission (as a consumer of said OSs) to make sure that those OSs are as secure as they can be. And some of the smartest security researchers on the planet work for NSA. So why not?
One of the NSA's growing missions is also to secure the electronic interests of the United States and its citizens. That includes doing anything they can to help secure the infrastructure of US interests. All our banks and national financial stability rely heavily on the security of computer systems. If they can't benefit from this added security, what's the point of securing a defense system if someone can hack into your federal bank system and make you lose billions?
So things like an overall more secure Solaris or Linux (or even Windows Vista) benefits everyone, including the electronic interests of the citizens of the USA, who the NSA also serves. Remember, they ARE a government agency (an occasionally evil one, though most of them do evil things every now and then.)
I don't know if it's Slashdot's reason, but here's my reason: underlined text isn't a typeface. Underlining is a historical artifact of the days when manuscripts were typed or handwritten before being sent off to be typeset. Typesetters traditionally had two faces at a given size: a standard one and one with emphasis (for naming titles of books and so on). The emphasis face was typically italic or bold, and the way the author of the manuscript indicated he wanted said face was by manually underlining the appropriate text with a pen. Underlined text never appeared in the final product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underline
sun will do everything to "buy" big names line nsa. if nsa is really serious about security, they should partner with the openbsd team and not sun. security through src code review is _real_ security and not creating a complex beast like selinux. complexity is an enemy of security. nothing good will come out of this partnership. solaris is the biggest piece of poo and there are better OSs out there. if nsa is seriously serious about security, they should partner with the openbsd team and not sun who's real intention is to make money by exploiting terms like "open source" and "free software"
Government organizations are the sum of its leadership, the people are just people like you and me. Please don't confuse the two, I can tell you from personal experience that the people who work at NSA are not out to get you, there's no pasty little nerd sitting there cackling to himself about going after Mr. Joe nobody.
"Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
that's hogwash. you don't use a compiler that you don't have the sources to.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
"Similar fate would befall you in total anarchism."
Total anarchism does not mean lack of order, it means lack of hierarchy. Anarchism is not the same as chaos. You can have laws in an anarchy, you just don't give anyone a monopoly on creating or enforcing them. It's not necessarily a free-for-all. It's not Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. Certainly those worlds are included in the set of all possible anarchistic societies, but they are not the only worlds, they are not innevitable, and few serious anarchists are trying to bring that about.
For more information see http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/.
That's all good and well in theory, but how well does it work in practice?
IDK how large the source for the average Linux distribution is, but I bet we're talking about dozens, if not hundreds of megabytes of code. You're never going to be able to audit all of it on your own, the only way to do an audit is to assemble a group of people and divide the work. But what if an insidious programmer added seemingly innocuous bits of code to dozens of files, so no single auditor is likely to see the entire backdoor code?
Also, the 'many eyes' argument in favor of FOSS sounds nice, but there's no guarantee those 'many eyes' ever see the entire source code. Seldom-used features will also rarely be audited, if ever.
You are half right. Anarchy is not chaos. It is the lack of "unnatural laws." Unnatural laws are the ones that create an uneven benefit to one group or person. A natural law would be the freedom from harm for not interfering with anybody. An unnatural law would be forcing somebody to pay for a service they neither use nor require, aside from your forcing them to do so.
People might do that if you were ready to do the same. You called a poster a sheep, and the parent replied by calling you a conspiracy nut. If you want respect, try earning it.
When it comes to the stuff that causes your tin foil hat to get warm, your way to late and they already took care of the rest years ago. For example why does every major Unix and router operating system use the encrypted root (or admin) password to seed the tcp sequence number. So if we look at what Solaris does with its tcp_strong_iss generator, its starts out by leaking bits that are derived from the password hash along with a very weak and predictable pseudo random number. The system is such that you have to watch the thing for a very long time but the entropy from the pseudo random generator goes away after a while and your left with just the bits of the hash which you can work backwards and collect enough of the encrypted password to get decent results in a random table. AIX, HPUX and IOS all do it about the same way.
I'm more worried that the Solaris coder that thought it would be a good idea to rewrite their telnetd in a way that opened a huge back door is still working for them.
But not when SELinux is disabled, right? When running in permissive mode, it logs all would-be denials, but does not enforce them. When disabled, SELinux doesn't do anything at all.
Oh, my bad. I run it in permissive mode. You're correct.
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
the silly notion that human-reviewed code is somehow safe is a childish fairytale. i don't care how many of you repeat this old wife's tale - it's trivial to prove wrong...
if this were true, we would never ever see a software crash. all it would take is a careful human 'review'.
the dustbin of software system history is quite replete with 'code-reviewed' systems.
the same religious belief drives those who think that they are the only keepers of back doors and that these are so well hidden as to never be discovered by others.
lessee - how many bugs are there in these 'vetted' kernels?
NSA employees are supposed to say they work for the Department of Defense. They are not technically supposed to mention the NSA. But there are obvious exceptions like college recruiters and whatnot. They don't do a good job of hiding it like they used to.
I've even heard bits and pieces of stuff they do from a very high and somewhat abstract level (from recruiters and other campus events). Not as thrilling as you might think from the sound of it. But neither is working for every other tech company; some specific project teams excluded of course. *shrug*
This isn't news. .GOV helped Sun build Trusted Solaris back in the day (they also helped Hewlett-Packard develop Trusted HP/UX). The government isn't doing this stuff to be evil, and I know my saying, "Don't be paranoid," won't make anyone any less paranoid -- but really the government needs certain security features to solve its problems (such as Cross-Domain information sharing), and the commercial industry simply doesn't need that stuff. Or, at least, it doesn't think it needs it. The only way for the government to get the OS features it needs is to work with a company directly to do it, or use an open source alternative.
.GOV decided to work with companies. Like I said, Trusted Solaris, Trusted HP/UX, and some others that I can't think of, were created. Along came Stephen Smalley and his FLASK security architecture. Linux was the first and easiest place to implement it, and the NSA spearheaded the project. You can imagine that Sun (the only vendor of an OS that supported multi-level data just a few years ago) wasn't all that happy -- .GOV pretty much promised Sun, "If you build and maintain your trusted OS, we'll keep buying licenses and hardware."
Originally,
Now that isn't so. It seems only fair to help Sun and the Solaris community in the same way that the government has helped RedHat and the Linux community: provide some resources and some know-how to make the OS do what the government wants, so as to not hand RedHat a huge government-assist...the government basically wants competition here. As a taxpayer, I can't say that I'm complaining...
Reid
The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
How do you compile the compiler?
There is this famous trick of having a virus/trojan in the compiler so that when it compiles (another) compiler it will insert the virus into the new compiler too.
See Ken Thompson, Reflection trusting trust.
... and still my professor insists that all titles be underlined. Ugh.
>that's hogwash. you don't use a compiler that you don't have the sources to.
The grand parent was making a reference to a historical case where a compiler binary was created that would create a back door in compiled software. Editing the compiler sources in this case would normally help, except that the compiler was designed to detect that it was recompiling itself and reinsert the code that had been removed from the sources.
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/emergingtech/edge/archives/ken-thompson-and-the-selfreferencing-c-compiler-16142
In this case, it's impossible to determine the back door exists by reading the sources, or remove it by editing it.
Quote: "Sun and the NSA are claiming that this move is more about the NSA joining the OpenSolaris community than anything else..." Gimme a big break on that. NSA is afraid of Linux and wants to get away from Microsoft's vulnerability. Thinking they have security through obscurity. Not gonna happen. Besides, why would anyone expect the truth about what they are doing from the National Security Agency? Christ. Cr0vv.
With a compiler from an independent source, compiled with a compiler from another independent source. Thompson's trick is very neat, and worked when there was one standard system compiler. It won't work now that there are two dozen on the internet and GCC is developed at such a rate of knots that your virus would naturally break within six months.
I am trolling
setenforce 0 and a reboot. How the hell long did that take?
I am not here to earn respect from anybody. Especially when there nothing but trolls, SEO contractors, and political organizations moderating this so called forum. I do not need their respect. I am likely one of the few people here NOT being paid to make comments. Can anyone else say the same? Like damn fucking few,
Piss on everyone else. Moderated my comments and get on with your life. Just because you dislike what I say does not mean I care.