Slashdot Mirror


White House Website Switches To Open Source

Falc0n writes "WhiteHouse.gov has gone Drupal. After months of planning, says an Obama Administration source, the White House has ditched the proprietary content management system that had been in place since the days of the Bush Administration in favor of the latest version of the open-source Drupal software. Dries Buytaert reflected on this, adding: 'this is a clear sign that governments realize that Open Source does not pose additional risks compared to proprietary software, and furthermore, that by moving away from proprietary software, they are not being locked into a particular technology, and that they can benefit from the innovation that is the result of thousands of developers collaborating on Drupal.'"

219 comments

  1. Re:Why CMS by lukas84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are you a troll, naive or stupid?

    A CMS is required if you want content to be updatable by non-programmers, which is almost always a very requirement on larger corporates pages.

    A CMS will also allow versioning of content, making it easy to publish new content at specific points in time.

  2. Re:Why CMS by chapstercni · · Score: 1

    No reinventing of the wheel.
    All kinds of stuff that can be used as is, or modified.
    Features, features, features.
    Easy separation of presentation / Data.
    Workflow.

  3. Re:Why CMS by sadness203 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and since you are at it, instead of generating webpages with a database for, say, 10,000 products, let builds each of them individually. A database always limits what you can do or how you should do it... Great logic.

  4. Re:Why CMS by sopssa · · Score: 0, Troll

    Both of those things can be accomplished on your own code too, so thats not really a reason. Maybe you / your coders don't have to do as much work, but then it will limit you to that CMS's features, limitations and ways to do things.

  5. Re:Why CMS by jopet · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just a few reasons:
    * You want to automatically use templates and not replicate formatting code
    * You want different people that are not programmers to be able to update different parts of the website; you want to let them do it from their browser in a wysiwyg editor; you want to let them to easily first publish their articles on a staging host and then authorize somebody else to go online with it
    * You want to allow commenting, feedback forms, registered users etc.
    * You easily want to keep track of versions and revisions of published pages
    * You want to automatically index the pages for searches
    * You want to easily include dynamic(computed) data into your web pages

  6. Great... by SigILL · · Score: 0, Troll

    Now they're locked in to PHP.

    --
    Error: password can't contain reverse spelling of ancient Chinese emperor
    1. Re:Great... by NoYob · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now they're locked in to PHP.

      It's part of Obama's economic recovery program. Just think how many IT jobs this will create: maintenance, debugging, modifications, and security. Maybe we could have a Slashdot poll on who will pwn the website first. I think it'll be the Chinese as payback for the tariffs on tires.

      --
      It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    2. Re:Great... by aldld · · Score: 1

      Hey, at least it's open source, so it must be a good thing!

    3. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think how many IT jobs this will create: maintenance, debugging, modifications, and security.

      I'm thinking more about how many Government employee suicides using PHP will cause ...

    4. Re:Great... by sopssa · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, they should code it with Assembly.

    5. Re:Great... by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they should write it in a generic all-purpose language that can be translated to any programming language, proprietary or open. I guess reading the brainwaves and converting it to a website could do.

  7. Re:Why CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A better question is why so many practically static web sites use online content management systems. Is it just for convenience? Lack of thought? A life content management system on the server is a serious security liability. Many web sites could just as well use an offline CMS and push the data to the server when an update is made. A typical web server can handle orders of magnitude more visitors when there is only static content. Even if you aggressively cache the CMS output, that still leaves the security aspect. I guess it takes a Slashdotting / Digg effect before most authors realize that having a web site which can't handle 10 concurrent visitors is rather pointless.

  8. Re:Why CMS by lukas84 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why reinvent the wheel?

    Sure, you can program everything from scratch and that might even appeal to you if you're the CEO of a company that sells programming services, but in many cases it makes more sense to use off-the-shelf software (which drupal is - well, off an imaginery shelf where everything is free as long as you give back).

  9. Re:Why CMS by Mathiasdm · · Score: 5, Informative

    For one, the weight a CMS adds is compensated by all of the code that is already present, all of the plugins that can be added without any trouble, the possibility for non-coders to easily modify website content ...
    Especially for large websites, this can dramatically improve how fast you can update and improve your site.
    Also, if you don't want to use a CMS, a framework like Django or Ruby on Rails is the way to go. These allow you to program everything yourself, but already have a lot of functionality built-in, to avoid reinventing the wheel.

    --
    Join the anonymous, help develop the network: http://www.i2p2.de
  10. High profile target and popular CMS' by abigsmurf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with using Drupal for the White House is that it's a popular CMS and has lots of people looking for exploits and vulnerabilities. The second a proof of concept piece of code or an easy exploit is discovered, a few thousand script kiddies will decend to get their 15 minutes of fame.

    I'm not sure how Drupal fares with bugs and patching speed (I know Wordpress seems to get some high profile holes discovered) but even if all vulns are patched before someone takes advantage of it, you're still going to need an admin who's going to be constantly alert to patching it.

    I'm not arguing against closed source vs open, more about popular vs obscure.

    1. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by arctic19 · · Score: 1

      ...you're still going to need an admin who's going to be constantly alert to patching it.

      But you would expect that with the WhiteHouse.gov being such a high-profile website

    2. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You could just as easily turn that argument around and say that because it's a popular CMS and has a lot of people looking through it's code for exploits, it's also a lot more secure than some other more obscure CMS which would have much less reviewed code.

    3. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Such a system should not be exposed. It should be behind a modern firewall, with a solid IPS. With such measures in place script kiddies will find it considerably harder to get their 15 minutes of fame, and even seasoned hackers will have to go to great extra lengts to get there - if they get there at all.

    4. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that was my reaction. What ever choice the White House made, it would still be a target for malicious hackers.

    5. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Norsefire · · Score: 0

      Drupal really has not been known for its security in the past; try Googling "drupal exploit", and I'm sure most webmasters are familiar with the "morfeus fucking scanner" user-agent that appears in logs from time to time checking for (among other things) active Drupal-related links (admin pages etc) to exploit.

      Maybe is has improved since the last time I paid any attention to it, I assume is would have been given an audit before being deployed on a Government website? That would be great for open source; "Open Source Software hacked, Govt website replaced with Goatse, Microsoft says 'I told you so'" ... It would be a media-fueled nightmare of FOSS if this goes wrong.

    6. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Kifoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You're assuming that the site's pages aren't served via a third party 'dumb' caching server, with the actual Drupal server locked down and disconnected from the internet.

    7. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The other side of the coin is that whitehouse.gov is a major target whatever it is running. If they used an obscure CSM there might not be many exploit scripts but the code might easily contain very bad vulnerabilities that black hats would quickly find, because they now have a reason to look at $OBSCURE_CSM.

    8. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by kamelkev · · Score: 5, Informative

      I run a fairly high profile drupal site - and this has always been a large concern for us.

      Our solution was basically to disable user logins completely. An overwhelming number of the exploits require you to login, so by removing this prerequisite, we basically avoided the problem.

      Security isn't exactly a priority for drupal either, it's almost added as an afterthought. To put things in perspective, their login page doesn't even support SSL by default in either drupal 5 or drupal 6. To me that's verging on pathetic.

      We were lucky because user logins weren't a core part of our site concept when we implemented the site, but I am now thinking that it might be a good way to go in the future, but I'm mostly petrified of this problem.

      On the bright side of things they include a large number of extensions, and things mostly work as advertised, so we found this to be our best option out of all the open source CMSes we tried.

    9. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by pjr.cc · · Score: 1

      well, drupal (so far) has been quite good at patching its own problems...

      Modules on the other hand are a different beast (and in some ways the can be a pain with drupal) - some are coded by drupal them selves, some are not so your miliage can vary.

      But this is where open source can actually benifit, cause if you do have access to coders (im sure the whitehouse does right?) you can fix it yourself (or at least get a work-around going for a short time).

    10. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Bozovision · · Score: 5, Informative

      I think you are misinformed. Morpheus seemed to be targeted at a range of software, including Joomla, but not Drupal: as far as I can see, none of the URL's it scanned are Drupal-based. See http://zeroq.kulando.de/post/2008/08/20/morfeus-fucking-scanner for example, but there are others out there.

      In fact, Drupal has an excellent history of security. We find holes, fix them and issue patches. There is a security mailing list that anyone can sign up to. You will receive mail on the latest security fixes. Your Drupal installation will tell you when components are out of date, and when there are security updates. It will also email you on a regular basis if you don't care to look at your status, or ignore the status message at the top of the page when you log in as an administrator. Drupal will not download and install components without human intervention: components require manual installation.

      Just like any software, I'm certain that Drupal has as yet undiscovered exploits. What's important is whether they are found and fixed, and we have a good track record of doing this.

    11. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      Wait, are you trying to say it might be possible that closed source might be safer than open source in some situation?

    12. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Popular OSS products are generally popular for a good reason. Many people find them to be useful. Lots of people looking for exploits on a popular product means that, all things being equal, the more popular product will be more secure, not less, so long as security holes are being attended to by the project's maintainers. If a product is good enough to become popular, that usually means that the product also has people working on it who know what they're doing, and with a lot of interest in a product it means that there's likely to be more interest in contributing improvements. Going with an unfamiliar/poorly known/obscure solution isn't going to help whitehouse.gov. People know about whitehouse.gov, and are going to want to attack it, regardless of what they implement the site in. If it's some obscure solution that few people know about, then you can be sure very quickly people will start to learn about it. So selecting a more obscure solution isn't going to help them out any.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    13. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by yelvington · · Score: 3, Funny

      If your security beliefs are based on Googling " exploit" I hope you're not in charge of anything important.

    14. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Nemyst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Didn't most people agree that security through obscurity is bad? If using popular open-source software was so bad, how come so many servers use Linux?

      I'd argue it's the exact opposite: by choosing a popular, mature CMS, they're insuring a LOT of the vulnerabilities have been found, exploited and fixed. The major difference between the White House site and Joe Web Dev's site is that the former will probably only upgrade for security fixes and will be very careful with new features, since that's where the bugs and exploits can hide. With good sysadmins, proper security tools and good practices, the site can be very safe. I just don't see them using alpha versions of modules and such.

      On the flip side, I'm hopeful that WhiteHouse.org's programmers and sysadmins will also contribute to the codebase with fixes and improvements of their own. This could end up being very beneficial for the Drupal community.

    15. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > I'm not arguing against closed source vs open, more about popular vs obscure.

      Whatever they use is going to be a high-profile target just because they are using it. Security by obscurity doesn't work for such sites.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    16. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're right. Block port 80, that'll stop 'em.

    17. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Funny

      Security isn't exactly a priority for drupal either, it's almost added as an afterthought.

      not any more!!

    18. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 3, Funny

      You're assuming an unusually high level of competence in government IT departments.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    19. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by elashish14 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, it's www.whitehouse.gov for the Obama administration. I'll let it slide though; as long as you don't confuse it with whitehouse.com - not linkified for a very special reason....

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    20. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by oldspewey · · Score: 0, Troll

      Is that what we're calling RushBots these days?

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    21. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a receiver of the Drupal security emails, I can tell you the team is very active. There are a lot of community developed Drupal modules, and the security team is well into combing through them. The documentation for writing secure code is easily found and followed. Drupal is quite well done, plain and simple. It's a gem in the FOSS world. And companies like Acquia,where Drupal's original creator can be found, offer support services that include moving a Drupal site into Amazon's cloud. It is worth learning.

    22. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Ykant · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Proper firewalls do more than simply block ports.

      --
      Spelling, grammar, punctuation? We need something that checks logic.
    23. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by saltydogdesign · · Score: 2, Informative

      The advantage to using Drupal for the White House is that it's a popular CMS and has lots of people patching exploits and vulnerabilities. The second a proof of concept piece of code or an easy exploit is discovered, a few thousand developers will descend to get their patches submitted.

      As opposed to your homegrown CMS, where you only discover the security holes when 3gotiZt posts pictures of full frontal nudity on the home page of your site.

      --
      // This is not a sig.
    24. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of Open Source, why the fuck does Slashdot comment thresholding work properly in Internet Explorer but not Firefox or Safari?

    25. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by nobodyknowsimageek · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing against closed source vs open, more about the many advantages of security through obscurity.

      There, "fixed" that for you.

    26. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's the same reasoning Microsoft makes with Windows being more secure than OS X! ;)

      [Not really, I'm just trying to be mildly humorous].

    27. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by amRadioHed · · Score: 0, Troll

      I doubt many dittos heads have the skills to be malicious hackers.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    28. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by blakhol · · Score: 2, Informative

      Drupal really has not been known for its security in the past;

      On the contrary. Drupal was one of the big open source projects to have a dedicated security team performing code audits and going through a security release process.

      Drupal automatically checks for security updates (both in the core and in contributed modules) and can notify you immediately of updates. If, you know, you think that kind of thing is important.

    29. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by blakhol · · Score: 5, Informative

      Security is most certainly not an afterthought for Drupal.

      Up though version 6 you needed to turn on a module like Securepages module to enable SSL logins.

      The upcoming Drupal 7 has SSL login support in core.

      See http://crackingdrupal.com/blog/greggles/drupal-and-ssl-multiple-recipes-possible-solutions

    30. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Xeriar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They picked Drupal, not Joomla or Wordpress

    31. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by RudeIota · · Score: 1

      As much sense as that makes and as true as it may be, those who exploit will always be one step ahead of those who patch the exploits.

      --
      Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
    32. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by abigsmurf · · Score: 1

      With Linux you can heap extra layers of security on so that exploits can't be attempted. You not only have to deal with an exploit, you need to get past all the other security measures too.

      With a web based CMS you are constantly exposed and exploits can implemented and run in minutes (mod security only provides limited protection). You don't need to infect a webserver to do damage, you just need to be able run an sql query or upload a file with code.

      There will always be a timelag between an exploit being identified and a patch being installed on a server and that's a real problem for sites like The White House.

      An online store can ensure it's e-commerce sections are heavily sandboxed, a popular news site may get the odd attack which will get mentioned by a few blogs. The White House however would make for major news if it was defaced or delivered malicious code to users and it would be under attack far more than almost any other Drupal sites.

      Drupal is a big target. Exploiting Drupal means being able to hack 10,000's of sites.

      Assume you have 10 people determined to hack the white house. In a custom CMS, you've 10 people searching for exploits and abusing them when one is found. In a popular CMS, you then have 1000 people looking for exploits and, once one's published the 10 people from the first case then proceed to code an attack in an attempt to beat the patch.

    33. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...with the actual Drupal server locked down and disconnected from the internet.

      How does the caching server get the original cache? Do you connect the actual server at some point, clear the cache, and let it answer requests, or do you push a cache?

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    34. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by will_die · · Score: 1

      Provided they are following standard government security procedures for such sites it will not matter if they are broken into since the only info the server are items that have been approved for release to the public.

    35. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by nmb3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      because it's a popular CMS and has a lot of people looking through it's code for exploits, it's also a lot more secure

      As pointed out, Wordpress easily proves this long-believed mantra false. It's one of the mostly widely used blogging applications and it is consistently in the news for high-profile hacks and exploits. That, and Drupal hardly seems immune.

      What's even more interesting is the possibility for intentional security flaws in the code. Interested parties can start submitting patches and changes to the Drupal codebase with inherent flaws. These might even be distributed (module A has a flaw that uses module B's flaw that uses module C's flaw...), which combined with submissions over a series of weeks or months and it seems unlikely they'll be easily spotted.

      This is the real downside to using open source code in government applications -- In four months the White House website may be running code written by Chineses (or Russian or whoever) hackers (who may or may not be government employees) for the sole purpose of exploiting the site. Expand this into internally used applications like MediaWiki, Pidgin and it has even bigger implications for intelligence gathering and infiltration.

      Major programs like these are big and complex. If the Debian OpenSSH fiasco taught us anything it should be that when you combine big and complex, don't be surprised if those many average eyes are insufficient to catch what the few skilled and experience hands put in the codebase.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    36. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by g253 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So they fork it and maintain it themselves. Problem solved.
      (okay, it's not that simple, but it's still a nice option to have)

    37. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by poopdeville · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can push a cache. It is basically what the government is doing, with Akamai.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    38. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd argue it's the exact opposite: by choosing a popular, mature CMS, they're insuring a LOT of the vulnerabilities have been found, exploited and fixed.

      Yeah - as of this month, 13 that I've received warnings about from the Drupal security mailing list! And that's DOWN from 16 in September!

      It's not Open Source that's the problem, it's that they're using Drupal that's the problem. Drupal (and PHP webapps in general) are kind of notorious when it comes to insecurity.

    39. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      "Upcoming" is the operative keyword here.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    40. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're certainly right the Drupal has a lot of visibility. On the other hand, is it the end of the world if Whitehouse.gov gets exploited? If we can assume that the site is reasonably managed, and does not have a direct pipeline from the front end web server into the CIA's servers, then the likely worst result would seem to be that misinformation would be published. This isnt' good, but it would probably get detected fairly quickly by partisans. We're not talking missle launch systems here.

      If Drupal helps the government interact better and communicate better with us, and reduces their costs for doing so, I think the security risk is probably reasonable. That said, I'd be surprised if Drupal is particularly weak. We don't hear much about exploits. The top link from a google of "drupal exploit" is dated 2005.

      Lets ask the question a different way: Should the whitehouse use an open source webserver like Apache or Tomcat for the webserver, or should they use IIS? Should they run on open source Linux, or Windows Server? Or should they write their own webserver and OS, to avoid the hacking risk that an opensource system creates?

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    41. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

      On the flip side, I'm hopeful that WhiteHouse.org's programmers and sysadmins will also contribute to the codebase with fixes and improvements of their own. This could end up being very beneficial for the Drupal community.

      I think it will be a huge positive for Drupal's use in the business world. That alone will be beneficial to the Drupal Community.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    42. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if Drupal had better export as static HTML than exists in the one module.

      Alas, most of the CMS systems lack this, or if they had it no longer do. (Yea, I'm looking at you Lenya)

    43. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by lamapper · · Score: 1

      This is the real downside to using open source code in government applications --

      The reality is something quite the opposite and very different. Any flaw in open source can be found in proprietary software. There are many flaws in proprietary software that are NOT found in open source software.

      I find that most open source exploits, not all of them, require the cracker to have ID/Password access and/or local (behind the firewall) access. Not much of an exploit if you do not have secure ID/Passwords. And if the exploit requires local access to the machine and/or network...that is a non issue for almost everyone. With the White house and/or its data center, good luck with getting local access....

      Open source is an excellent choice for all government applications. I appreciate when less of my tax dollars go towards software and hardware thanks to a lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for open source and FOSS software.

      Please stop spreading FUD.

      --
      Is your Internet Throttled? Install DD-Wrt, OpenWRT or Tomato to learn the truth! Google: 1Gbps/1Gbps: 5 Communities
    44. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SSL logins would be trivial to add as a default. i would guess that they go non-SSL by default to get more low-end shared hosts to support it, thus improving its popularity.

    45. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps you would also like to talk about all that closed source proprietary code that government espionage agencies all over the world have access to. In fact most governments are now refusing to you closed source proprietary code unless they have access to the code to scan for back doors not only put in by corporations for then own advantage but put in by governments via secret warrants and not disclosed for national security reasons.

      The biggest difference between closed source and open source in government. When government start analysing, bug finding and error correcting private closed source code, they are in fact corruptly subsidising the business activity and profitability of one company ahead of all other companies. When are government conducts the same identical activity with open source, that investment is in fact return to every single member of the public and every company has access to and can make use of those efforts and expenditures.

      As for intentional flaws in open source, what a load, most secure places do not run the latest version but let it run around in the wild for a few months, not only given them time to fully and publicly audit the code but also allowing time for faults to be discovered across the wider community. Want to know the biggest example of corruption in closed source proprietary software code, a glaring example of why it should never ever be trusted, Diebold voting software, those people actually even fought it out in court to hide their source code from the foolish governments that used it after it was proved to be extraordinarily and perceived by many to be purposefully faulty.

      The reality is any downside of open source is inherently in closed source as well, on the other hand there are many downsides to closed source that are not associated with open source software.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    46. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by r7 · · Score: 1

      The reality is any downside of open source is inherently in closed source as well

      Agreed, but this (Drupal) really isn't about open vs closed source, it's more about well audited code vs not. Can't believe someone even equated more vulnerability announcements with more secure! If that were the case then Microsoft would be the most secure OS and OpenBSD the least.

      Secure code takes a lot of auditing, both internal and external. It also takes a set of design guidelines and their enforcement. Limewire did and Frostwire does a really good job of this, and they use a secure language (Java) as well. Drupal scores relatively poorly on all of these counts.

      A more secure site would have to run something that can be pre-compiled, is statically typed, and has so many compile-time checks that runtime errors are few. That basically means Java and of the Java CMS I'm familiar with Vignette has the edge. It is, unfortunatley, not open source. It is also complex and expensive. But for a site like whitehouse.gov it would have meant far, far better security and far less management overhead than Drupal.

      So go ahead and mod me down for even suggesting a non-OSS solution is better. Before you do though, please point out where, aside from price, Drupal is better.

    47. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the whole thing was done by private sub-contractor specialists.

    48. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Angostura · · Score: 1

      I was pretty disturbed when I looked at the new features in version 7 to find that it would salt password files for the first time. The fact that version 6 does not use salt didn't give me a particularly warm and fuzzy feeling regarding security.

    49. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't really matter. Crackers steal a copy of the closed-source CMS, audit the code, and find a couple of 0-days. They make strategic use of the ones that let them actually manipulate the underlying OS rather than just the webapp itself. The kiddiots get wind of the sploits and wreak havoc. Closed-source CMS eventually gets patched.

      TL;DNR: Same shit, different day.

    50. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Proteus+Child · · Score: 1

      That's great!
      So, what would YOU recommend that they use? What CMSes have you personally audited, deployed, and helped fix? You're the expert, help us out here!

      --

      Proteus' Child

      Doko ni datte; hito wa, tsunagette iru.

    51. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1

      Nope, it won't. My now defunct (but for different reasons) website that ran Drupal got hacked via FTP and incompetence of the managed hosting company. In that case, blocking port 80 would only prevent people from seeing it was hacked.

    52. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where have you been for the past several years? whitehouse.com quit being a site that you couldn't link to "for a very special reason" and became a useless site that has rotated through a number of different uses.

    53. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by lfaraone · · Score: 1

      The problem with using Drupal for the White House is that it's a popular CMS and has lots of people looking for exploits and vulnerabilities. The second a proof of concept piece of code or an easy exploit is discovered, a few thousand script kiddies will decend to get their 15 minutes of fame. I'm not sure how Drupal fares with bugs and patching speed (I know Wordpress seems to get some high profile holes discovered) but even if all vulns are patched before someone takes advantage of it, you're still going to need an admin who's going to be constantly alert to patching it. I'm not arguing against closed source vs open, more about popular vs obscure.

      They're the federal government. Anything they do won't be obscure.

      --
      Maybe if this signature is witty enough, someone will finally love me.
    54. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Norsefire · · Score: 1

      It was to demonstrate that there were holes being actively exploited in Drupal in the past. I knew there were holes because I remembered seeing the Morfeus scanner (as I mentioned above) guessing various webapp-related URI's in my logs, but as Bozovision pointed out above I must have had Drupal confused with Joomla (both PHP, both weird names).

    55. Re:High profile target and popular CMS' by Norsefire · · Score: 1

      I think you are right in that I got Drupal confused with Joomla.

  11. Re:Why CMS by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Businesses have come to accept the limitations of software, and will often adjust the way they do things to fit in with whatever the software requires, sad but true.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  12. Re:Why CMS by andy1307 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    do you write you own operating system?

  13. Re:Why CMS by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Forget the OS - do you reckon he designs and fabricates his own CPUs?

  14. Something fishy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Ok, Netcraft's history seems to be screwed up, but I can tell you this:

    Right after BO was inagurated, I checked the site. It had just switched over from Bush's site to BO's. Netcraft reported that Bush's site had been Apache on Linux, and BO's new site was IIS on MS.

    1. Re:Something fishy. by oldspewey · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but what was the proprietary CMS that was running on Apache/Linux?

      In other words, what did they switch from.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:Something fishy. by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Funny

      In other words, what did they switch from.

      They switched from capitalism to communism, silly.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:Something fishy. by pmontra · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe the parent wished to be modded as funny. What happened along the years is that CMS products have been turned into commodities. The White House recognized that and switched the investment into the service of updating the contents. Optimizing the way one spends money looks a basic precept of capitalism to me, very American.

    4. Re:Something fishy. by oldspewey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Parent was not trying to be modded funny. I am genuinely trying to understand what the previous proprietary CMS was: Vignette? FileNet? Documentum? Stellent?

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    5. Re:Something fishy. by pmontra · · Score: 1

      By parent I meant Rockoon's post. Sorry for not being clear about it. BTW, I'd also like to know what the WH was using before Drupal.

    6. Re:Something fishy. by micheas · · Score: 1

      I suspect your memory is a little faulty.

      Akamai has been reverse proxying whitehouse.gov for quite some time.

      So IIS on linux might have been reported, but all sites akamai proxies for show up as being on linux. See
      http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=search.microsoft.com for example

      of IIS/6.0 on linux.

    7. Re:Something fishy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the administration's cheap to use a software package written by a bunch of chumps writing code for free.

    8. Re:Something fishy. by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      I was indeed trying to be modded funny.

      Mission accomplished.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    9. Re:Something fishy. by pmontra · · Score: 1

      Glad to have been helpful :-)

  15. Cool by dword · · Score: 0, Troll

    OK, guys, now everyone should shut up about anything the government does, because it went open-source, right?
    *crickets*
    Does the Obama administration really think they can buy us off that easily? It's a significant step forward, but I don't think we should bother to praise them in any way.

    1. Re:Cool by dingen · · Score: 1

      It's a significant step forward

      It's quite a sad state of affairs when moving to one of the most common and widely used back-ends for a website is considered "a significant step forward".

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Cool by oldspewey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As stated in the article, this wasn't done to earn your praise.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    3. Re:Cool by east+coast · · Score: 1

      What do you mean "buy us off"? Do you honestly think this is going to get them any real favor? People around here have a way of overestimating the value of open source to the man on the streets or even the geek on the streets for that matter.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    4. Re:Cool by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "It's quite a sad state of affairs when moving to one of the most common and widely used back-ends for a website is considered "a significant step forward"."

      Bullshit - it's not a "step" anywhere.

      This is ONE part of the government changing ONE system over to open source. That's it. The whole "since the Bush Administration" comment is a red herring:

      a) Drupal only went Open Source in 2001. "Hey, it's time to update the Whitehouse.gov back end, and there's this new cool thing that just got released. It's maintained by a bunch of enthusiasts, and has no support, but I think it's a great idea!" "Perkins, go back to trolling for porn."

      b) Does anyone really think the president in ANY administration gives a rats ass about the back-end of the website? Remember, Bush was ridiculed for not even using email, but somehow it's his policy that only proprietary software be used for invisible parts of the website? Likewise, Obama was a lawyer, "community activist", professor, and politician. Which one of those would make him care about this?

      I'm more than happy another Open Source effort has been used for a high profile installation. But please - this isn't "Change", or even a policy change, or even an operations change from the White House point of view. This is changing from "Tide" to "Bold" to wash the Presidential underwear.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:Cool by Loadmaster · · Score: 1

      Giving praise does not mean you're no longer critical of the government. Governments are like dogs, give praise when they do little things right so they will do bigger things right. Correct them when they do things wrong so they will do them right. This is a small step that could lead to more open source in government, why not tell them you like it and ask for more?

      This is a good first step, but I doubt any of us have forgotten/forgiven who is 2 and 3 and the DoJ.

    6. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush WAS pro-Microsoft, he backed their side in the antitrust trial, and very soon after the election, almost all their punishment was dropped. I have no doubt that he went proprietary, or hired the advisors who would guarantee that.

    7. Re:Cool by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Bush WAS pro-Microsoft, he backed their side in the antitrust trial, and very soon after the election, almost all their punishment was dropped. I have no doubt that he went proprietary, or hired the advisors who would guarantee that."

      Of course, that had nothing to do with the first judge shooting his mouth off, or the appellate court voiding the penalties, or the second judge (a Clinton appointee, btw) agreeing to a lesser penalty, OR the appellate court confirming the settlement, OR the governments lead prosecutor running like hell from his "success" in the MS case to lead such efforts as Bush v. Gore and the SCO lawsuit.

      No, it had to be that Bush could only pause fellating Gates long enough to call the Justice Department and have the case spiked because of his personal reservations about the GPL.

      Or you are an idiot. I'm not sure which one more likely.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    8. Re:Cool by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      Considering Obama's stated love for his Blackberry and his understanding of technology, I wouldn't be too surprised if he actually knew what open source was or heard about Drupal or CMSes... ...but that's not really the point. We're talking about the Executive Branch here, not Obama himself. The whole point is that the IT people Obama brought in with him have no problem embracing open source. Compare with previous administrations that were ideologically opposed to open source, and you'll see why it's significant. I think this story is highly indicative of the cabinet Obama brought in. Look at what's happening in the FCC regarding net neutrality, EPA actually starting to do their job again, etc.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    9. Re:Cool by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      You are still thinking too low level. "The IT people Obama brought in with him?" Do you really think he has his own Geek Squad? He brought in the WH Chief of Staff, and that was the end of that (for him at least).

      Yes, Obama definitely has a different ideology than Bush did. But I don't know how that applied to Open Source. For instance, you say that "previous administrations ... were ideologically opposed to open source." Really? I can't remember it being mentioned in any official context AT ALL, much less negatively.

      And drawing a direct equivalence along the lines of "liberal:Open Source::conservative:proprietary" is not necessarily valid. There's only a small, small set of people that make an ideological distinction between Libre software and Free Beer software - a lot of them just happen to hang out on /.. But for the vast majority, software is a tool. Some aspects of the tool may have ideological ramifications - for instance, when I went to buy a new floor jack to work on my car, I tried to buy one made in America. But in the end, whatever I bought, it's most important trait is it's usefulness as a tool.

      The Obama Administration is certainly ideologically different than the Bush Administration (although I believe less so than his supporters think). But that doesn't mean it applies to all aspects of everything the Administration touches. I'm glad Drupal scored a win - let's just not read too much into it, shall we?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  16. Clearly by Chelloveck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    this is a clear sign that governments realize that Open Source does not pose additional risks compared to proprietary software

    Huh. Now to me, this is a clear sign that they hired a new web guy who happens to have experience with and a preference for Drupal. I don't think there's a necessarily a political statement here.

    --
    Chelloveck
    I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    1. Re:Clearly by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The new guy does not get to just through any random software into a government system with no oversight...

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Clearly by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Huh. Now to me, this is a clear sign that they hired a new web guy who happens to have experience with and a preference for Drupal. I don't think there's a necessarily a political statement here.

      The top of the government and especially the president are HR people first and foremost. They don't do much personally, but act through the agents they select, rely on their judgement and trust them to condense issues of importance for them. Sure, they also get to make some decisions, but they decide based on the information fed to them and the decisions are broad, policy decisions in most cases.

      The point is, they didn't make a policy decision that "zomg, F/OSS ftw!", but they hired the guy who hired the guy who hired the guy who hired the web guy and the web guy seems competent enough to pick a F/OSS solution.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    3. Re:Clearly by turing_m · · Score: 1

      The point is, they didn't make a policy decision that "zomg, F/OSS ftw!"

      Sure, that's the way it works in theory. But how do you really know that a PHB looking to leverage some synergies didn't hand down this decision from on high? It's not like the private sector has a monopoly on incompetent management. (Yes, I know this applies equally well and probably moreso to "zomg $PROPRIETARY_SYSTEM ftw!" and even more likely to "zomg $SYSTEM_OWNED_BY_COMPANY_I_OWN_SHARES_IN ftw!")

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  17. Oh, the Obamas are so cool now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I just wish they'd pull through in their promises of being open as in transparent. I don't give a fuck what they do with their web site but what lobbyists are showing up for the meetings is important to me.

    I guess it's hard to be openly honest when it will prove that you're a liar. Obama had the chance to change the way his office works from the ground up and fumbled the ball. Now we're getting the same old same old.

    1. Re:Oh, the Obamas are so cool now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, technically EVERY President had the chance to change the way his office works; you didn't actually think anybody would do it, did you? Granted Obama is better than Bush, but when the bar is set so low that's not really saying much. First and foremost Obama is a politician; therefore, you have to assume that he's going to do the exact opposite of what he says. Liberal or Conservative has nothing to do with it.

  18. PHP based? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wish they used something Python based:

    def askPresidentQuestion(q):
            if president == "Bush":
                    misSpeak()
            elif president == "Obama":
                    pass

    1. Re:PHP based? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent said:

      def askPresidentQuestion(q):
                      if president == "Bush":
                                      misSpeak()
                      elif president == "Obama":
                                      pass

      Umm, I think it's more like:
      def askPresidentQuestion(q):
                      if president == "Bush":
                                      misSpeak()
                      elif president == "Obama":
                                      startTelePrompTer()

    2. Re:PHP based? by idlemachine · · Score: 1

      The pythonic solution would be to swap the if/elif for a dictionary dispatcher... ;)

  19. Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that. Allowing feedback on the high profile website is STUPID and ignorant.

    They should have a static website with automatic refreshes from a dynamic back end where uses can edit and publish whatever they like.

    They will be hacked, it is just a matter of time.

    1. Re:Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by yelvington · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that. Allowing feedback on the high profile website is STUPID and ignorant.

      Apparently, allowing feedback attracts the stupid and ignorant.

    2. Re:Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by Ma8thew · · Score: 1

      Why do you assume they're not doing that? I would expect that given the high traffic whitehouse.gov receive all pages will be heavily cached.

    3. Re:Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do you assume they're not doing that?

      Because he's a moron who doesn't understand how CMSes are actually used in the real world, and thinks the only point of them is for 'dynamic' content.

      When in actual fact something like half of all CMS sites are mostly 'static', with maybe a forum and an RSS feed block being their sole 'automatically changing' area, and then rest is so that people who don't know a hell of a lot about web sites can fricking manage the site, or at least their area of it, and add and remove content.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    4. Re:Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They will be hacked, it is just a matter of time."

      When the domain was under windows servers, nobody on /. cared. Now that they're on Linux, there's doomsaying?

    5. Re:Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I don't want Whitehouse.gov doing that. Allowing feedback on the high profile website is STUPID and ignorant.

      Apparently, allowing feedback attracts the stupid and ignorant.

      Here's some feedback for yah, ... oh wait?!?

  20. Just wondering... by aldld · · Score: 2

    Just out of curiosity, what were they using before?

  21. The friend of my enemy is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...and that they can benefit from the innovation that is the result of thousands of developers collaborating on Drupal.'"

    All located in countries hostile to the west.

    1. Re:The friend of my enemy is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holland (home of Drupal founder Dries Buytaert) is hostile to the West?

      Personally, I'd call a country that *doesn't* bust your ass for enjoying a little dope and/or an evening with a hooker pretty damn friendly, but maybe that's just me.

    2. Re:The friend of my enemy is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holland is not a country, but a province in The Netherlands. To add insult to injury; Dries Buytaert is from Belgium, a country to the south of The Netherlands.

  22. Re:Why CMS by pjr.cc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    theres alot of good reasons people use cms... and let me try and use your own words... say you wanted a website that looked like cisco's.

    In a CMS, (such as drupal)... heres who does what:
    1) designer writes a theme for the website (to give it the look)
    2) content producers write the pages
    3) codes do the bits the cms doesn't already do.

    The point is, the CMS gives you alot to begin with without limiting you, sure you could code a website from scratch but something as powerfull as drupal is going to take a long time. You may not need everything drupal does so you can cut that down a bit. But ultimately you'll end up with something that allows people to do their jobs (i.e. content producers to write pages). Drupal CMS is also especially good at being extended (and there are virtually no limits that I can think of). So rather then writing a whole heap of code to do your website, your coders just write what they need to extend the CMS - "dang, drupal doesnt do rsa based two factor auth, we're going to have to code it in" as apposed to "ok, lets get started on coding a website - quick grab 15 people who know architecture".

  23. Screw that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I make my own fucking ELECTRONS!

    1. Re:Screw that! by gander666 · · Score: 1, Redundant

      You too? I thought I was the last one who did...

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
    2. Re:Screw that! by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dude, why are you being so negative?

    3. Re:Screw that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you know how fucking hard it is to make POSITRONS?

    4. Re:Screw that! by RudeIota · · Score: 1
      --
      Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
    5. Re:Screw that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's just filling holes.

  24. Re:Why CMS by slimjim8094 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So when you write your own code, you've written a CMS. But you just passed one up because it was too heavy-weight...

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  25. Socialist Software by KuNgFo0 · · Score: 0, Troll

    My first reaction to seeing this article was how long it will take for Fox News and friends to declare open source software as socialist and how comrade Obama has taken jobs away from hard working capitalist programmers. It's really not a stretch given their track record.

    1. Re:Socialist Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will be the next breaking news... an other proof that Obama is Communist. After all Bill Gates said something like that about OpenSource software.

    2. Re:Socialist Software by rvw · · Score: 1

      My first reaction to seeing this article was how long it will take for Fox News and friends to declare open source software as socialist and how comrade Obama has taken jobs away from hard working capitalist programmers. It's really not a stretch given their track record.

      Take a look at the drupal logo. I think this calls for a big investigation to confirm that Obama is an alien!

    3. Re:Socialist Software by Monsuco · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My first reaction to seeing this article was how long it will take for Fox News and friends to declare open source software as socialist and how comrade Obama has taken jobs away from hard working capitalist programmers. It's really not a stretch given their track record.

      foxnews.com's server runs on Linux according to Netcraft.

  26. Re:Why CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I do.

    And no drupal is not a solution. Most CMS products are insecure pieces of shit. I would not use a CMS for a high profile target like that. They should be publishing static files with a custom system. Only pages that must be dynamic should be. It's just dumb. Did you guys forget how the web worked before CMSs came around?

  27. One step to a post-scarcity future, but just one by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yet, even as the White House becomes more efficient and the website costs less to build and operate, this is one more step towards a post-scarcity future that the White House is not otherwise directly engaging, like by promoting a "basic income" for all regardless of whether someone "works":
    "Why limited demand means joblessness"
    http://www.beyondajoblessrecovery.org/2009/10/03/why-limited-demand-means-joblessness/
    "Summary: Mainstream economics assumes demand for almost anything is infinite. Thus, the theory goes, when human workers get replaced by robots, or better design means less human labor is needed, then there will soon be new jobs making new things; the only issue might be retraining. But, if demand is limited (because the best things in life are free or cheap, and everything you own also owns you), then when people get laid off, the jobs are gone for good, because there is nothing more that anybody wants then is already produced. And people having more time outside of compulsory work would be a good thing, if we more evenly shared the wealth from automation and better design, but we don't -- yet."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  28. Re:Why CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You are one dumb motherfucker sopssa. Never forget that.

  29. There's more to it than your personal preferences by yelvington · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If some of the people who post here were as smart as they think they are, they'd figure out:

    * Whitehouse.gov is not running Drupal on a ten-dollar shared server at GoDaddy.com.
    * Building and maintaining a large, continuously updated website is not something you do in a weekend with Notepad, a giant bag of Cheetos, and a case of diet Coke.
    * Any Drupal project of this scale involves layers of extremely high-performance caching and multiple firewalls.
    * The site's administrative tools aren't available from the outside. (This is not difficult to implement.)
    * Life does not begin and end with your personal favorite programming language, database server, etc., or with the boundaries of your parents' basement.
    * Security reports are reports of vulnerabilities that have been fixed, not vulnerabilities that lie in wait to ambush your site. A properly run open-source project has a documented process for handling security issues.

    I don't know any details of the site's technical architecture beyond the obvious, but it's blazingly fast. My bet is that when you hit the site, you're pulling completed pages out of RAM on a customized and hardened Varnish, but that's just a guess. The HTTP headers identify the server technology as "White House."

  30. What next? by howardcohen · · Score: 1

    Will the White House hold a press conference if Obama switches to Firefox from IE?

    1. Re:What next? by sopssa · · Score: 0, Troll

      Everyone knows he uses Lynx.

    2. Re:What next? by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      Will the White House hold a press conference if Obama switches to Firefox from IE?

      Wait, is that the "change we can believe in"?

  31. Open Source Education IT by micromegas · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hopefully this will drive a push to utilize open source in other aspects of government. Specifically secondary education. School districts across the country are locked in symbiotic dependency to profit driven computing / IT services and systems. Linux offers a robust full service option but gets NO (very little) attention from the department of education. DOE, Please support those of us who are trying to save money with open source in the schools!

    1. Re:Open Source Education IT by tulare · · Score: 1

      If you want to see a large part of the reason that this happens, look no farther than places like this:

      http://oetc.org/cgi-bin/searchbytype.pl

      Seriously, at $2.30 per CAL for Exchange...

      --
      political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
  32. patriotic duty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As of now, there are 471 pending bugs on the Drupal project. It is your patriotic duty as a geek to go fix some bugs.

    1. Re:patriotic duty by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      It will be interesting to see the first bug report from the White House. With all the layers of security they need, they are undoubtedly going to push Drupal's envelope in some novel ways.

      Or maybe we will see evidence of a White House bug stomping party, or contributed code, first. I'm sure that the tech guys at whitehouse.gov will give back to the community somehow.

      Is there a way to monitor drupal.org for White House activity? Can we see some "First sighting!" competitions? Or should we look for press releases: "White House fixes 37 bugs; reports 17 new ones"

      This could change some things.

      --
      Will
  33. Re:Why CMS by turbidostato · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Both of those things can be accomplished on your own code too"

    Yes, of course. And do you know how the internal app you developed so to allow non-programmers to update content, so PHBs can review the content prior to go public, so you can version contents and pre stablish the date it will go alive, etc. will be called? It will be called a "Content Management System".

    So in the end you won't avoid the CMS you'll just develop your own internal one: reinventing the wheel, at a cost, and probably worse.

  34. Re:Why CMS by Kaboom13 · · Score: 1

    Pretty sure noone in the world wants a website that looks like Cisco's. It's the worst site by a major technology company I've ever used. To get to anything I normally have to login 3-4 times because it randomly forgets your logged in, only to find out that what I was trying to get to was just a link back to where I started. And forget trying to download the software my account privileges say I should be entitled to, I always wind up using someone else's account because despite several attempts on Cisco's part to fix it it STILL won't let me. Honestly for the company that practically runs the internet, their website is just shameful.

  35. Re:Why CMS by MooUK · · Score: 1

    Are there many static-CMSes (for want of a better term) like that available?

  36. Re:Why CMS by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Did you guys forget how the web worked before CMSs came around?"

    Yes: it did work slower, more expensive and less functional. I even remember why first intranet efforts used to fail: because content stagnated due to the fact that only programers that didn't produce the information in first place were the only ones allowed and/or with the knowledge to modify contents.

    "Most CMS products are insecure pieces of shit. I would not use a CMS for a high profile target like that. They should be publishing static files with a custom system. Only pages that must be dynamic should be. It's just dumb?"

    You do know you can have your CMS administrative backend opened only to your internal networks so from the Internet all you have access to is an static, pre-cached, read-only version, do you?

  37. Re:Why CMS by mrjohnson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because if I change it, I have to have a service request, check it into svn, build, file a request for change, deploy during a change window, etc. If the users can change content in a CMS, no paperwork required.

  38. That's totally wrong. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First off, most leaders of the left wing imagine a future where scarcity is the norm, largely because they see the consumption of natural resources by the West as unethical in a larger world view. In their eyes, Americans already have "too much" and therefor should have to make due with less. This faux-conservatism, coupled with the right wing's stupid devotion to "free trade", is the underlying cause of this current economic crisis. It is that people want more stuff, resources are capped by environmental and ideological considerations, so, prices of goods are shooting up and people have less. Demand falls off, and unemployment shoots up. You add in free trade, and take away America's advantage in energy prices and expose our disadvantage in labor, and the country is totally fucked up.

    It's pretty simple, actually.

    Let's just think this through for a minute. Let's say that instead of having to borrow or raise taxes to have national health care, the USA simply turned around and issued permits to drill in ANWR and off the coasts. Instead of scraping to come up with 900B to pay for it, we would have that money coming in from ANWR alone, without a tax increase. Let's say for a minute that we build nuclear power plants everywhere, and lowered the price of energy to something like the 2 cents per kwh it is to operate a nuclear plant. Everyone would have effectively a 20% raise because of the energy savings not only for themselves but in the cost of every product or service that they buy, and that in turn would lower the price of medicine. If gasoline were a dollar a gallon, and electric bills not more than $20 a month, and food was cheap as well, everyone would feel pretty darned rich. Consumers would spend, tax revenues to the government would go up, and you could have an administration that throws national health care on the table coupled with a modest tax cut.

    Bottom line is, regardless of whether you want to have the government doling out the goodies, or get yourself a tax cut, or even a combination of both, the most effective thing the government could do to do that would be to say screw the environmentalists and get cheap energy, no matter what. Energy -is- wealth, and the more wealth you have, the more stuff you can swing.

    If everyone felt rich, than putting a national health care plan would be no big deal.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except you completely ignore externalities, systemic risks, and equity, which is what got us in various messes already.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

      Consider the "True cost" of oil from various perspectives:
      http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461
      """
      Milton Copulus, the head of the National Defense Council Foundation, has a different view. And as the former principal energy analyst for the Heritage Foundation, a 12-year member of the National Petroleum Council, a Reagan White House alum, and an advisor to half a dozen U.S. Energy Secretaries, various Secretaries of Defense, and two directors of the CIA, he knows his stuff. After taking into account the direct and indirect costs of oil, the economic costs of oil supply disruption, and military expenditures, he estimates the true cost of oil at a stunning $480 a barrel. That would make the "real" cost of filling up a family sedan about $220, and filling up a large SUV about $325 (when oil was $10 a barrel cheaper than it is now!).
      """

      By the way, I've read it takes as much *electricity* to produce a gallon of gas as it would take an electric car to go about the same distance. So, all the external costs of gasoline are totally for nothing energywise.
      http://www.evnut.com/gasoline_oil.htm
      "So I can get 24 miles in my ICE on a gallon of gasoline, or I can get 41 miles (at 300wh/mile) in my RAV4EV just using the energy to refine that gallon. Alternatively - energy use (electricity and natural gas) state wide goes DOWN if a mile in a RAV4EV is substituted for a mile in an ICE!"

      Depending on other regions for energy creates a systemic risk. Pipelines are inherently indefensible and so require a police state to protect because one small group could do vast damage to the society by damaging just one oil pipeline. Solar panels on your roof do not require a police state to protect, just regular police; if someone vandalizes them, the entire economy does not collapse.

      Concentrating wealth in the hands of a few who control oil companies also creates a wealth dispartity that damages democracy as well as the economy (because few can start small businesses without loans or investments from big organizations). One reason we have oil pipelines instead of solar panels everywhere is that it has been more profitable to a few people to do that, while the rest of us pay huge taxes for a military to defend those pipelines at home and abroad.

      I could go on, but basically, you need to look at issues like externalities, systemic risks, and concentration of wealth to see the various ways that markets can and do fail regularly in practice unless they are taxed and regulated. Taxes and regulation have their problems too, of course:
      http://www.capitalismhitsthefan.com/

      Ideally, we need to move beyond markets and rationing for most things. So, your enthusiasm is great. You're right that cheap energy would help with a lot of things (as long as it was also relatively clean, inherently safe, and long lasting -- like wind and solar and many other renewables). Ideally, we want an energy infrastructure that is inherently secure, not brittle and requiring now about a trillion dollars a year to secure extrinsically with soldiers and bombs:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittle_Power

      Still, if all the benefits of cheap energy or any other major innovation go to a few people, then we just have another problem. See Marshall Brain's short story on this:
      http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

      You're right that a left that focuses on rationing and scarcity is dysfunctional; that has historically b

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    2. Re:That's totally wrong. by tjstork · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Externalities, Concentrations of Wealth, etc... is a made up word excuse for socialism.

      --
      This is my sig.
    3. Re:That's totally wrong. by tulare · · Score: 1

      Really? I mean, I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am saying you've just made a direct statement of fact with no justification whatsoever. It's not even an argument.

      --
      political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
    4. Re:That's totally wrong. by tjstork · · Score: 1, Insightful

      but I am saying you've just made a direct statement of fact with no justification whatsoever

      Yes and no. I think your out would be that if you could address your concerns of concentrations of wealth and externalities without some of federal assumption of ownership, its pretty hard to avoid socialism.

      The thing is, that, if you have a government to keep wealth from getting concentrated, it's wealth will get concentrated. If you make the government the sole arbiter of some bit of land or sky, then, it will be corrupted as that arbiter... and that's really foolish from a risk management standpoint.

      The whole point of private ownership isn't some magical devotion to Adam Smith (who was totally wrong on trade)... its just that having lots of private entities makes it easier to spread social risk about. If we all had our one acre of land, even if one of us screwed it up, humanity could continue. But if the King owned all the land, then, the King could screw up all the land, and frequently, will.

      Really, when it boils down to it, just that the tragedy of commons doesn't look at risk management at all, and so is therefor totally wrong. I'm migrating my site to Linux and once that is done, I'll post a computer simulation about the tragedy of the commons that really makes it stand out why this is so. You have to admit, seeing something like that on the old Freeper will be a heck of a lot more interesting than the boring old "well, golly, that's socialism if we do that!"...

      --
      This is my sig.
    5. Re:That's totally wrong. by tjstork · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The key really is, how do create a social mechanism to prevent excessive concentrations of wealth, without creating a defacto concentration of wealth?

      It's almost like you need to have the social rules set up so that its easy come, easy go... once you reach a certain point in wealth, it should be easier to blow it and lose it all.

      --
      This is my sig.
    6. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2, Informative

      From The American Conservative:
      http://www.amconmag.com/article/2005/mar/14/00017/
      """
      This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society.
      The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments.
      """

      There are other aspects of a good life beyond those, like community.

      Markets have all sorts of problems:
      * systemic risks of collapse, especially from pyramid schemes involving debt
      * negative externalities like pollution are paid by society
      * positive externalities like global health are ignored in product design
      * money tends to get centralized, as it takes money to make money
      * those with a lot of money set standards to benefit themselves
      * competition can be very wasteful if people otherwise agree on goals
      * preparing and fighting war is profitable
      * as above, human labor is needed less and less for production
      * money tends to corrupt the political process
      * the market doesn't hear the needs of people with money, so people can starve or sicken amidst physical plenty
      * extrinsic security and planned obsolescence may be more profitable than intrinsic security and durable goods
      * money distorts information flows about news
      * money corrupts the medical decision making process (conflict of interest)
      * money corrupts academia (Kept University)

      There are probably others. :-)

      Sometimes, market processes are the best we can use. But we need to be aware of where they go wrong. The USA has been greatly damaged over the last few decades by "market fundamentalism". Markets may be a great way to ration scarce goods if everyone has some ration units to pay with, giving everyone a right to some share of the industrial commons. But, as we have already seen globally, when the market does not need people's labor like in Africa, or the market is run by organizations so powerful they don't have to pay much for labor, then things can go badly.

      Markets and the fear of starvation or the fear of looking bad socially or the desire to get ahead of everyone else materially may motivate some people to do some disagreeable jobs. But we now have the technology to rethink most jobs to make them more agreeable, or to eliminate them entirely if they are unpleasant to everyone (like by using robotics or better design). Ultimately, the income-through-jobs link is breaking as predicted here:

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    7. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      "I'll post a computer simulation about the tragedy of the commons that really makes it stand out why this is so."

      I'd encourage you to do that. I hope your simulation includes the fact that it usually takes money to make money, and then one can see the consequences of an accumulation of wealth in a few actors in the system then gaining a lot of decision making power. For many people, the golden years of the USA were when the marginal tax rate on top income was above 90% to counter that trend. :-)
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt

      And then you can also model the effects of a "basic income" within your assumptions. :-)
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

      A basic income almost passed under Nixon.

      The great thing about a simulation is it forces people to make their assumptions explicit and look at the consequences of playing with them.

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    8. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "If we all had our one acre of land, even if one of us screwed it up, humanity could continue. But if the King owned all the land, then, the King could screw up all the land, and frequently, will."

      And if one of those people on their one acre of land makes a bioengineered plague, then everyone dies? Or, when the nuclear power plant next door melts down, we permanently evacuate Manhattan?

      Here is something to consider, by Manuel de Landa:
      http://www.t0.or.at/delanda/meshwork.htm
      "Indeed, one must resist the temptation to make hierarchies into villains and meshworks into heroes, not only because, as I said, they are constantly turning into one another, but because in real life we find only mixtures and hybrids, and the properties of these cannot be established through theory alone but demand concrete experimentation."

      Manuel de Landa suggests we need a healthy balance between meshworks and hierarchies.

      By the way, make sure you get enough Vitamin D while working inside on simulations, as I agree the public health agencies have dropped the ball on a lot of things:
      http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/newsletter/vitamin-d-and-h1n1-swine-flu.shtml
      http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml
      http://curtisduncan.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-michelle-obama-is-more-likely-to.html

      Also, on "socialism":
      http://digg.com/political_opinion/Socialist_Agencies_Destroying_America_Graphic
      """
      This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.
      I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.
      After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
      I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
      At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level
      determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.
      On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.
      After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.
      And then I log on to the internet -- which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration -- and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in me

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    9. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2, Informative

      "On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school."

      I should have caught that as a problem too. Someday, public schools may be much more like public libraries open to anyone to use than day prisons for children of working parents, but until then, consider:

      "Links about alternative peer-oriented education"
      http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Education

      "The Underground History of American Education" by 1991 NYS Teacher of
      the Year John Taylor Gatto
      http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.htm

      "The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher" also by John Taylor Gatto
      http://www.newciv.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt

      "State Controlled Consciousness" also by John Taylor Gatto
      http://www.the-open-boat.com/Gatto.html

      "The Big Crunch" by David Goodstein, Vice Provost, Caltech
      http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/crunch_art.html

      "Disciplined Minds" by Jeff Schmidt
      http://www.disciplined-minds.com/

      "What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream" by Noam Chomsky
      http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm

      "University Secrets:Your Guide to Surviving a College Education" by Robert D. Honigman
      http://web.archive.org/web/20060707100524/www.universitysecrets.com/us.htm

      "In Defense of Childhood: Protecting Kids' Inner Wildness " by Chris
      Mercogliano, who spent thirty-five years teaching at the Albany Free School
      http://www.chrismercogliano.com/childhood.htm

      "Teach Your Own" by John Holt (and other books)
      http://www.holtgws.com/

      "The Teenage Liberation Handbook" by Grace Llewellyn (and other books)
      http://gracellewellyn.com/

      "The Emergence of Compulsory Schooling and ... Resistance" By Matt Hern
      http://web.archive.org/web/20071014123355/http://www.social-ecology.org/article.php?story=20031028151034651

      "Sustainable Education" by Jerry Mintz
      http://www.greenmoneyjournal.com/article.mpl?articleid=195&newsletterid=1

      "Federated Learning Communities"
      http://www.ericdigests.org/2000-1/learning.html
      http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/ilc/models.html

      "The Three Boxes of Life and How to Get Out of Them: An Introduction to
      Life/Work Planning" by Richard N. Bolles (also writes "What Color is Your
      Parachute")
      http://www.amazon.com/Three-Boxes-Life-How-Them/dp/0913668583

      General related:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies_My_Teacher_Told_Me

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    10. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      A rebuttal to the "socialist agencies" comment I quoted is here by "hiram":
      http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/08/a_savage_mob.html

      Hiram makes some good points. Still, is not regulation of monopolies something you need a government for? Also, much drug research is fundamentally based on publicly funded (NIH) studies. Also, broadcast media was in general much better for families when there was an equal time law and restrictions against advertising to children. So, some of the problems he points to are the result of deregulation as well as shifting government resources away from "butter" and into "guns". I agree public schooling is a big problem (see John Taylor Gatto and my other post).

      We need to separate out various functions of government like regulation and oversight or taxing and redistributing wealth for legitimate public purposes (including avoiding a concentration of wealth that is bad for democracy, like with a progressive tax up to 91% under Roosevelt after WWII) from the issue of who actually provides the services.

      But, as I said earlier, take a look at this video of a high speed robot hand from Japan and tell me *anything* about our economy will make sense as-is in ten or twenty years:
      http://www.hizook.com/blog/2009/08/03/high-speed-robot-hand-demonstrates-dexterity-and-skillful-manipulation

      Or even this:
      From:
      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2159038/posts http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202191.html
      "Armed robotic aircraft soar in the skies above Pakistan, hurling death down on America's enemies in the war on terrorism. Soon -- years, not decades, from now -- American armed robots will patrol on the ground as well, fundamentally transforming the face of battle. Conventional war, even genocide, may be abolished by a robotic American Peace.
      The detachment with which the United States can inflict death upon our enemies is surely one reason why U.S. military involvement around the world has expanded over the past two decades. The excellence of American military technology makes it possible for U.S. forces to inflict vast damage upon the enemy while suffering comparatively modest harm in return. ...
      The rapid emergence of the armed unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) that roam over Pakistan is a sequel to Moore's Law. Onboard computers became far more powerful, so automatic pilots became far more competent. Signal processors became more sophisticated, facilitating collection and processing of more interesting intelligence. Global Positioning System receivers shrank and could be economically employed on small robotic aircraft. Precision-guided munitions could deliver lethal firepower. And so forth. ...
      The U.S. Navy has arguably moved farthest toward substituting treasure for blood. A generation ago the Reagan administration brought World War II-era battleships out of mothballs to provide gunfire support to onshore operations. With a crew of more than 1,500, these ships were designed to be manned by the low-paid draftees of the 1940s, not the more amply rewarded volunteers of the 1980s. The Navy couldn't afford them, and the ships were soon returned to mothballs. In their place, the Navy came up with the new DDG-1000 Zumwalt destroyer, an automated warship with a crew of only 150."

      I came across that while looking what the freepers say about robots:
      http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/robot/index?tab=articles

      Anyway, many conservatives don't get it about technology invalidating muc

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    11. Re:That's totally wrong. by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The key really is, how do create a social mechanism to prevent excessive concentrations of wealth, without creating a defacto concentration of wealth?

      I think you're framing the problem incorrectly. I think the question should be, how do we make sure that enough wealth is distributed such that society can reasonably function, and that we feel decent about how we are treating the least fortunate among us?

      Focusing on the concentration at the top is just jealousy. The ethical concern is at the bottom of the pyramid, in my view.

      If the wealthy are prudent, they will remember the lessons of the French Revolution and Russia in 1917, and make sure that they pass enough around so that people can live. If they don't, then they run the risk of having their wealth appropriated, either piece-meal through taxes, or in total, through revolution. I do not suggest that is what morally -should- happen, merely that history indicates it -will- happen.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    12. Re:That's totally wrong. by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      First off, most leaders of the left wing imagine a future where scarcity is the norm, largely because they see the consumption of natural resources by the West as unethical in a larger world view. In their eyes, Americans already have "too much" and therefor should have to make due with less. This faux-conservatism, coupled with the right wing's stupid devotion to "free trade", is the underlying cause of this current economic crisis.

      America's economy isn't screwed up due to "free trade" nor due to leftarded concerns over consumption. It is a recession. If you haven't noticed in the history of our country we have been in and out of dozens of these. The economy goes up sometimes and down others, it always has, it always will. Yes, manufacturing will die off more and more. This isn't a problem, we are just becoming more and more of a service based economy.

      Globalization doesn't mean that one nation will win and the other will lose, assuming that it does means you are making the same economic mistake that people have made since the days of Adam Smith, namely believing trade to be a zero sum game. If I buy a $30 table from China, it doesn't mean the Chinese economy gains $30 while the US economy loses $30, it means I gain a table I value more than my $30 dollars while the Chinese table maker gains $30 which they value more than their table. Both of us have gained something more valuable to us. The $30 wasn't lost value. Money is just a token of value, it isn't the inherent source of it. Money is just an easy way to exchange value for goods and services. It also isn't like the Chinese table maker will eat the $30, they will likely use it to buy stuff (labor, supplies, investments, etc.) and at some point there will be something the US makes that will be exchanged, and even if there isn't something every country is best at, comparative advantage will eventually work it's way in over time.

    13. Re:That's totally wrong. by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Like Marxism, [libertarianism] aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics.

      Actually, this isn't quite accurate. A few years ago, when my wife was working on her Econ degree, she had a lot of interesting comments about an ongoing discussion of the position of Marxism inside the economics community. The basis of the discussions was that in the econ field's ongoing attempts to appear scientific, there is a general understanding that a primary test of a scientific theory is whether it can successfully make predictions about the real world. It's a bit of an embarrassment that some of the "Marxist" economists (both self-acknowledged and externally labelled ;-) have by far the best track record for accurate predictions. The reason for this seems clear: The "Marxists" don't model human behavior solely on money; they also consider power as a primary motivator. In fact, they tend to treat money as a proxy for power, rather than as a goal in itself. What tends to come out in the behind-the-scene discussions is that this is right, and it makes sense of a lot of economic behavior that others can't explain, but you can't publicly say that in any clear terms. If you do, you get labelled a Marxist, which in much of the current "first world" is the kiss of death to any professional career in economics.

      There seems to be a background conjecture among economists that their field can't become a real science until they find a way to overcome this terminological problem. Some attempts have been made to introduce alternative, isomorphic terminology, but people tend to see through this and label you Marxist. It's possible that the field just has to wait for the emotional and political reactions to the word "Marxist" to die out. But considering how long such reactions to insult terms like "fascist" and "nazi" have hung on, this could be long after we're all gone from this mortal plane. OTOH, hardly anyone knows what "fascist" or "nazi" mean these days, and people are getting away with pushing similar policies under different names without much fear of being labelled for what they are. Similarly, "Marxist" may similarly reduce to just a meaningless insult word in the near future, in which case the approach may be revived under a different name with nobody understanding the fact, possibly leading to an improvement in the predictive powers of some economics theories.

      In a few discussions with her associates, I've suggested that economics, like politics, simply can't be made scientific, due to our innate inability to view such things in a detached, objective manner. But of course, I'm not an economist (or a politician ;-); I'm just one of those weird computer geeks, so my comments are instantly discarded as not relevant, and I go back into lurk mode.

      (She's working as a data cruncher in the medical field now, and getting more and more worried about what's going on in the American medical "industry". We might be in for some fun times in the next decade or so. If we survive; which isn't guaranteed by the models. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    14. Re:That's totally wrong. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      Wow, thanks for the fascinating and informative reply.

      Related links:
      http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue21/Stanford21.htm
      http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402
      http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/47

      On Marxism, Joan Roelofs
      http://mysite.verizon.net/joan.roelofs/index.htm
      has suggested that Charles Fourier said anything good that Marx said decades before him:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Fourier
      Bob Black wrote this essay inspired in part by Charles Fourier's ideas:
      http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/whywork/abolition.html

      My take on economics, inspired by cybernetics:
      http://www.pdfernhout.net/post-scarcity-princeton.html
      """
      In general, economists need to look at what are major sources of *real* cost as opposed to *fiat* cost in producing anything. Only then can one make a complete control system to manage resources within those real limits, perhaps using arbitrary fiat dollars as part of a rationing process to keep within the real limits and meet social objectives (or perhaps not, if the cost of enforcing rationing for some things like, say, home energy use or internet bandwidth exceeds the benefits).
      Here is a sample meta-theoretical framework PU economists no doubt could vastly improve on if they turned their minds to it. Consider three levels of nested perspectives on the same economic reality -- physical items, decision makers, and emergent properties of decision maker interactions. (Three levels of being or consciousness is a common theme in philosophical writings, usually rock, plant, and animal, or plant, animal, and human.)
      At a first level of perspective, the world we live in at any point in time can be considered to have physical content like land or tools or fusion reactors like the sun, energy flows like photons from the sun or electrons from lightning or in circuits, informational patterns like web page content or distributed language knowledge, and active regulating processes (including triggers, amplifiers, and feedback loops) built on the previous three types of things (physicality, energy flow, and informational patterns) embodied in living creatures, bi-metallic strip thermostats, or computer programs running on computer hardware.
      One can think of a second perspective on the first comprehensive one by picking out only the decision makers like bi-metallic strips in thermostats, computer programs running on computers, and personalities embodied in people and maybe someday robots or supercomputers, and looking at their characteristics as individual decision makers.
      One can then think of a third level of perspective on the second where decision makers may invent theories about how to control each other using various approaches like internet communication standards, ration unit tokens like fiat dollars, physical kanban tokens, narratives in emails, and so on. What the most useful theories are for controlling groups of decision makers is an interesting question, but I will not explore it in depth. But I will pointing out that complex system dynamics at this third level of perspective can emerge whether control involves fiat dollars, "kanban" tokens, centralized or distributed optimization based on perceived or predicted demand patterns, human-to-human discussions, something else entirely, or a diverse collection of all these things. And I will also point out that one should never confuse the reality of the physical system being controlled for the control signals (money, spo

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  39. Or just a big ass computer. by tjstork · · Score: 0, Troll

    Seriously, when the government starts talking about hosting, they can just throw hardware at it. When you are able to print money, the capital costs of anything are pretty much irrelevant.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Or just a big ass computer. by saltydogdesign · · Score: 2, Funny

      I work for the government, and uh, bullshit.

      --
      // This is not a sig.
  40. Re:Why CMS by jfengel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not necessarily a bad thing. Yes, sometimes it cuts off new and creative ideas. Often, those are bad ideas, and everybody else is doing it the regular way for a reason.

    This is especially true when a business is getting outside of its domain. If you're the best bottle-maker or book-binder on the block, do that. But your accounting and web site is almost certain to be identical to any other businesses, and crafting roll-your-own accounting or web management software specialized to your thing is quite likely the wrong thing.

    Not always, but I've found too many businesses err on the Not Invented Here side.

  41. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
    Building and maintaining a large, continuously updated website is not something you do in a weekend with Notepad, a giant bag of Cheetos, and a case of diet Coke.

    You must be new here!

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  42. Easy answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did they hold a press conference when they switched to Drupal? No, then why would they for a browser change. This news was reported by the AP and picked up by other third party sources: no press conference.

  43. What was te old CMS by snsh · · Score: 1

    I'd like to know what commercial CMS the white house dropped... Tridion, Interwoven, Fatwire, Windows Notepad? It's kind of weird that's not being mentioned.

    1. Re:What was te old CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'd like to know what commercial CMS the white house dropped... Tridion, Interwoven, Fatwire, Windows Notepad? It's kind of weird that's not being mentioned.

      American Eagle proprietary CMS: https://www.americaneagle.com/solutions/cms.aspx

  44. Re:Why CMS by jbezorg · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's your opinion and just because you have one doesn't make it the correct choice.

    In fact, I do remember how the web was before CMS came around. I remember people handing me MS Word documents saved as 150KB+ HTML files. Or having to clean up sections of the corporate site where someone cut-and-pasted from MS Word into the site.

    Heck, people made a living off writing software just to clean up the mess. Eliminate clutter in Microsoft Word generated HTML files with the Office 2000 HTML Filter

    And to Sopssa, He fails to realize that Drupal can be hardened and has the benefit of several years of testing and user feedback unlike a custom system.

    I clearly remember the days before CMS and it looked like this.

    <html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" > <head > <meta name=Title content="This is normal unformatted text" > <meta name=Keywords content="" > <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8" > <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document > <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10" > <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 10" > <link rel=File-List href="WordtoHTML_files/filelist.xml" > <title >This is normal unformatted text </title > <!--[if gte mso 9] > <xml > <o:DocumentProperties > <o:Author >Elizabeth Pyatt </o:Author > <o:Template >Normal </o:Template > <o:LastAuthor >Elizabeth Pyatt </o:LastAuthor > <o:Revision >1 </o:Revision > <o:TotalTime >1 </o:TotalTime > <o:Created >2003-10-22T19:05:00Z </o:Created > <o:LastSaved >2003-10-22T19:06:00Z </o:LastSaved > <o:Pages >1 </o:Pages > <o:Company >ETS </o:Company > <o:Lines >1 </o:Lines > <o:Paragraphs >1 </o:Paragraphs > <o:Version >10.2418 </o:Version > </o:DocumentProperties > </xml > <![endif]-- > <!--[if gte mso 9] > <xml > <w:WordDocument > <w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery >0 </w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery > <w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery >0 </w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery > <w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/ > <w:Compatibility > <w:SpaceForUL/ > <w:BalanceSingleByteDoubleByteWidth/ > <w:DoNotLeaveBackslashAlone/ > <w:ULTrailSpace/ > <w:DoNotExpandShiftReturn/ > <w:AdjustLineHeightInTable/ > </w:Compatibility > </w:WordDocument > </xml > <![endif]-- > <style > <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Times New Roman"; panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Arial; panose-1:0 2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Palatino; panose-1:0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Palatino;} h3 {mso-style-next:Normal; margin-top:12.0pt; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:3.0pt; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; page-break-after:avoid; mso-outline-level:3; font-size:13.0pt; font-family:Helvetica;} p.MsoBodyText, li.M

    --
    I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
  45. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Building and maintaining a large, continuously updated website is not something you do in a weekend with Notepad, a giant bag of Cheetos, and a case of diet Coke.

    NONSENSE! Everyone knows that there's no software project so complex that it can't be done in 3 days by an 8-year old kid, who'll do it for the Cheetos and Coke alone. And we've got any number of big-name sites and systems that demonstrate that that's exactly what must have happened.

  46. Re:Why CMS by Ironsides · · Score: 1

    Netscape 4.x came with something like that. It's latest descendant, SeaMonkey, has it too.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  47. Re:Why CMS by cliffiecee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not only that, but using Drupal means you have a built-in security/programming team, constantly updating, improving, looking for bugs, etc. If you write your own software, YOU have to maintain it, by yourself. Are you as good as the Drupal devs? (I know I'm not)

  48. Re:Why CMS by kova70 · · Score: 1

    You do know you can have your CMS administrative backend opened only to your internal networks so from the Internet all you have access to is an static, pre-cached, read-only version, do you?

    Ever heard of Akamai?? ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.whitehouse.gov. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.whitehouse.gov. 2034 IN CNAME www.whitehouse.gov.edgekey.net. www.whitehouse.gov.edgekey.net. 16434 IN CNAME e2561.g.akamaiedge.net.

  49. Hardly by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

    Dries Buytaert reflected on this, adding: 'this is a clear sign that governments realize that Open Source does not pose additional risks compared to proprietary software, and furthermore, that by moving away from proprietary software, they are not being locked into a particular technology, and that they can benefit from the innovation that is the result of thousands of developers collaborating on Drupal.'"
     
    Or, more likely, the PHB in charge is running with Drupal because it's popular and CMS's are faddish right now, or worse yet maybe Drupal is the favorite one-size-fits-all solution of the head techie at the White House.

  50. They advertise their webserver brand as "White" by devlp0 · · Score: 1

    lol

    --
    >/dev/null 2>&1
  51. Outstanding by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

    I think it's great that the White House and The Onion have even more in common!

  52. My first take is by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    does this even offset a Administration which takes all the bad habits of the last and compounds them with super sized bills that no one gets to review and a good dose of intimidation against any who speak up?

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:My first take is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why is this insightful and not offtopic? Seriously now...

  53. Re:Why does FOSS have to be about ideology / cost? by tech10171968 · · Score: 1

    Insightful post. Completely off-topic but, still, you make some damned good points.

    --
    This space for rent!
  54. Re:Why does FOSS have to be about ideology / cost? by tjstork · · Score: 1

    Insightful post. Completely off-topic but, still, you make some damned good points.

    Yeah, totally off topic, but inspired somewhat by the commentary that inevitably follows an FOSS product adoption decision made by a major enterprise..., it's like "the movement" won. Maybe the gov't just picked the better product?

    --
    This is my sig.
  55. Re:Why CMS by Dhalka226 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With all due respect, are you a web developer?

    For starters, a well-developed CMS and some competent IT people can produce a site every bit as quick as a static HTML site, because that's exactly what they'll be serving up with good server-side caching. Any "weight" in the backend is more than offset by the increased ease with which content can be updated.

    Moreover, a CMS allows non-technical people to be involved in the process. Most likely, people from the press and communications offices are going to be the ones in charge of the content on this website, and it's not at all unreasonable to assume that most of them aren't going to be any good with HTML.

    And why should they be? CMS is exactly what it says it is -- a content management system, letting people focus on content by hiding away the markup and technical nonsense they're not concerned with anyway. Sometimes it's fully inappopriate; sometimes a custom one is better than off-the-shelf. But you really can't see why anybody would want to use one? Ever?

  56. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're using the Akamai CDN, has been for many years. That's probably why it's so bloody fast

  57. Awesome! by topham · · Score: 1

    This is Awesome, now all the Drupal vulnerabilities will be highlighted on a daily basis!

    I like Drupal, but security isn't really their strong point, nor is proper testing of their modules.

    Oh well.

    1. Re:Awesome! by blakhol · · Score: 1

      1. Drupal's security team is very active. The vast majority of vulnerabilities are with third-party contributed modules, not with Drupal core. The idea that "security is not Drupal's strong point" is false.

      2. For Drupal's upcoming release (Drupal 7) there is a heavy emphasis on testing. How heavy? You can't get a patch into Drupal 7 without also writing tests. Admittedly, you can't take such a heavy hand with requiring contributed modules to adhere to the same standard. Proper testing of contributed modules is up to that module's maintainer. A user review system like http://drupalmodules.com/ is useful in determining which modules are the best.

    2. Re:Awesome! by topham · · Score: 1

      Drupal inherently relies upon a large number of 3rd party modules to, effectively, do anything. As such, the entire eco-sphere of mainstream modules matters.

  58. okay, so you guys don't like Drupal's security... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Do any of you have a recommendation on what to use instead? Preferably PHP-based, so it has a realistic shot of being supported on most hosting plans?

  59. Static CMSs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes there are.

    It's done in two ways.

    1. Firstly, it can be built-into the CMS at two levels:
    A. Firstly, the CMS can output HTML. When the server comes to serving the page, it can just look for HTML. There are quite a few products that do this, but you lose some flexibilty because you can't include 'live' content: things that are changing all the time.

    B. Or it can be baked into the CMS at cache level - so a page is constructed on-the-fly, but from fragments which are drawn from cache and which are straight HTML. Any serious CMS has some variation on doing this.

    2. Or final delivery can be handed to a caching front-end or proxy, like Varnish, which is often used with Drupal for high-end sites. Varnish can delive pages from files, but is also smart enough that you can cache some things, but not others. You can also deconstruct a page, caching elements for different times. This can be valuable if your CMS does not have sophisticated caching strategies for personalised content. Varnish has other benefits - for instance it can be used to balance load.

  60. Re:Why CMS by blakhol · · Score: 1

    Most CMS's have plugins that generate the static content or serve it directly from memory. Drupal has a bunch of such modules. Boost, memcache, cacherouter, etc.

  61. Re:Why CMS by xanadu113 · · Score: 1

    The security team also looks for security holes in the modules, as well as in Drupal core.

    --
    -Myke
  62. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by xanadu113 · · Score: 1

    You must be new here!

    Yeah everybody knows, programmers drink Jolt.

    --
    -Myke
  63. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by Simetrical · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't know any details of the site's technical architecture beyond the obvious, but it's blazingly fast. My bet is that when you hit the site, you're pulling completed pages out of RAM on a customized and hardened Varnish, but that's just a guess. The HTTP headers identify the server technology as "White House."

    I don't know where you came up with Varnish . . . there are lots of ways to get performance that's just as snappy. A CDN is a good start. And it's pretty easy to tell that that's exactly what's being used here:

    $ dig +short www.whitehouse.gov
    www.whitehouse.gov.edgekey.net.
    e2561.g.akamaiedge.net.
    96.16.18.135

    They're using Akamai for most of their content, it seems. I get 35ms ping to www.whitehouse.gov from machines in New York, Denver, Holland, and Washington (the state). My Washington machine gets 2 ms ping, actually, so I'm guessing Akamai has a machine in the same data center. Varnish alone isn't going to get you anywhere close to that kind of performance – it can't beat light speed.

    --
    MediaWiki developer, Total War Center sysadmin
  64. Afghans Applaud use of Open Source! by For+a+Free+Internet · · Score: 0, Funny

    Those who haven't had a hand or two blown off by Obama's cluster bombs, that is...

    --
    UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
  65. Re:okay, so you guys don't like Drupal's security. by James+Carnley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually most people have been praising Drupal for its excellent security. You aren't going to find a CMS with a much better track record than Drupal.

    What they were mainly saying is that Drupal is extremely popular with lots of people looking to exploit it, so it might theoretically be a high risk. A less well known CMS would not have many people looking (well, that would definitely change overnight if whitehouse.gov chose it :) and is therfore a lower risk, but also has tons of exploits not found yet.

    Stick with Drupal if you want a tested, secure, and reliable CMS.

  66. Re:Why CMS by nmb3000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I clearly remember the days before CMS and it looked like this

    Ha! The planetarium scheduler for the the school I work at has an HTML file she edits in Word to create the current month's calendar. This file has been used for some 2-3 years. Pulling it up right now, it is 682 KB in size and has over 6,000 lines of CSS at the top of the document. Here's a snippet:

    p.bodybold1272, li.bodybold1272, div.bodybold1272
            {mso-style-name:bodybold1272;
            mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
            margin-right:0in;
            mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
            margin-left:0in;
            mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
            font-size:12.0pt;
            font-family:Arial;
            mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
            color:black;
            font-weight:bold;}

    The actual body of the document is about 400 lines of the most awful HTML table markup the universe has ever seen.

    To see this file in its entirety is a most humbling experience.

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
  67. Re:Why CMS by GaryOlson · · Score: 1

    Absolutely. Cicso's web site is in dire need of a CMS like Drupal. Just trying to use the website for solving technical problems is a good reason to seriously consider another network product.

    --
    Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  68. Don't forget about the Free Software... by jojo78 · · Score: 1

    e107.

  69. Re:Why CMS by ukyoCE · · Score: 1

    Of course the flip-side is that your off-the-shelf software also has off-the-shelf exploits, sometimes in functionality you don't use or even know existed. That's more a reason to upgrade such software frequently though, than reason to avoid it entirely.

  70. Re:Why CMS by poopdeville · · Score: 2, Informative

    But your accounting and web site is almost certain to be identical to any other businesses

    Is that why I can't find any accounting software to deal with non-taxable stock dividend distributions from investment activities?

    You don't know what you're talking about.

    --
    After all, I am strangely colored.
  71. Does this make Drupal the first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Communist Management System?

  72. Re:okay, so you guys don't like Drupal's security. by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

    Supported on most hosting plans? I'm pretty sure the Federal Government's hosting plan includes whatever they want. For a high enough price, they could get a TCP over Carrier Pigeon server and run a mirror off that.

  73. Re:High profile target and poorly designed CMS by r7 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Security is most certainly not an afterthought for Drupal. ... The upcoming Drupal 7 has SSL login support in core.

    Equating SSL with security is emblematic of the Drupal code base. It is, in my experience, the least secure CMS available. Just look at how regular and often Drupal vulnerabilities are announced. Even the Apache configuration requires you to enable FollowSymLinks!. The website says this was a security workaround but it is also as big a hole as the one it fixed. RewriteEngine also cannot be disabled. And the database load is far, far greater than any well designed CMSs. Pile PHP on top of that and you have, well, a pretty insecure webapp (to be diplomatic). I'm sure the Feds will do all sorts of extra stuff to monitor and patch this particular site, and I hope they contribute patches back, but I would not recommend Drupal to anyone who does not have a relatively extensive background in system monitoring, PHP, MySQL or Postgres, and Apache.

  74. You know, a lot of people here are very silly. by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, whitehouse.gov is a very attacked site, for all sorts of reasons, and I bet it will be the very first place to try out any new Drupal vulnerability, and at least one of those will succeed sometime in the next couple of years.

    But, um...who cares if it does? It's not a mission critical web site. It's stupid fluff pieces about the president and his initiatives. If something goes wrong it gets flipped offline, restored from backup, patched, and brought back online.

    It's interesting to see the government try OSS, and that might be an interesting discussion, but way too many people(1) here instantly leapt to the non-existence security implications, acting like important government computers were going to be exposed via any security issues in Drupal.

    1) And half the remaining people appear to be morons talking about how CMS are useless. They haven't realized that stating 'people don't need CMSes' doesn't, like they think, show that they're some elite HTML coder, it just reveals them as someone who's never been hired to make a web site for someone else who then can add and remove content.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  75. The joys of drupal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love Drupal and I think it is a good choice. Outside the concept of it being a in a three tier system, drupal's strengths lie it in it's scalability, high availability. and the very easy plug-in architecture. CCK is one of the best designed plug-ins ever written.

  76. Drupal is dire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the worse I have ever had the misfortune to come across, and I have been forced to work with drupal in a few jobs. Granted is has a fantastic plug in system, it easily extendible, and has great scalability features. Read: crap, very crap, granny's blog.

  77. Incorrect on almost all points by Bozovision · · Score: 3, Informative

    It would appear that your experience doesn't stretch terribly far; off the top of my head I can name several much less secure systems. Finding, fixing and announcing vulnerabilities is a good thing: by your measure a hugely exploited CMS with no fixes would be better!

    Regarding you assertion that the rewrite engine cannot be disabled; this is just plain wrong. The Apache rewrite engine can be disabled without any problem. If you do this, then you won't enjoy clean URLs, instead you'll have URLs like www.somesite.com/index.php?q=some/path instead of www.somesite.com/some/path. Internally Drupal always works with the first form. However, the rewrite engine is a widely used Apache module - with perhaps millions(?) of sites using it. It may very well have exploits - just as any software may - but it is trusted by lots of users.

    Followsymlinks can be disabled too. It's required for rewriting and for one form of upload. Drupal works without problems without it. However, there's nothing inherently insecure in symlinks, and the default Drupal directory layout does not symlink to outside of the install tree.

    Database load. I note that your assertion about load is without any reference to figures. I'm not certain which CMS you think is well written. However I'll note that there is a general problem with CMSs which are designed to be easily extensible: tightly integrated system usually use a single SQL statement to retrieve data - the designer knows all the constraints at design-time. A loosely coupled system is usually not able to do this: the designer has little idea of what will be present at run time. So it's in the nature of most loosely coupled system to run one query or more for each additional module. Drupal uses a loosely coupled callback orientated architecture. This means its very easy to extend. However the downside is that each module will usually include extra tables. Drupal is fairly smart about loading this extra data, but beyond that, to counteract the tendency for growth in queries, Drupal has a caching subsystem that is active in several layers. For anonymous users, Drupal only runs a few queries which determine where in the cache the data sits, and returns it.

    Perhaps you'd like to elaborate with some firm figures and an example of a CMS that in your opinion does it right.

    Regarding PHP security. Again - have you any firm facts to show that PHP is inherently less secure than any other language? The consensus in security circles is that openness is better for security. *You* are able to download the PHP source code and contribute patches. If you know of a security issue, I'd urge you to help fix it. Or is this opinion without facts to back it up?

    Again, I'd be interested to know which CMS you do recommend to the person in the street. I would not at the moment recommend Drupal for most brochureware sites, though it is capable of brochureware, however for sites in excess of about 100 pages, for sites where there is a heavy community aspect, and for sites which hope to change and grow, Drupal is an excellent choice.

  78. And this is bad how? by Bozovision · · Score: 1

    Are you complaining that the security team takes time to go through the 2000+ components, find problems and notify you?

    You can unsubscribe from the list, and rely only upon the status subsystem, which if you have not switched it off, will notify you on a regular basis about upgrades and security fixes for the only modules you are using.

    In contrast to your assertion: Drupal has an _excellent_ security history, and the fact that you are alerted about updates serves to highlight this.

    You may wish to switch to a CMS which has no security warnings, but I would not feel comforted by lack of warnings.

  79. Uh... No It's not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Dries Buytaert reflected on this, adding: 'this is a clear sign that governments realize that Open Source does not pose additional risks compared to proprietary software"

    Uh... Not it's not. It's not like there is classified data on the whitehouse.gov CMS. What's the worst that's going to happen? Some right wing nut hacker like Eric Raymond is going to have in and replace Obama's picture with one of Joseph Stalin?

  80. yeah! by JumpSocial · · Score: 1

    This will harden Drupal. Worth while.

    --
    Inventor, Artist http://www.Rubber-Power.com
  81. Re:okay, so you guys don't like Drupal's security. by machinegestalt · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but Plone kills drupal when it comes to design expandability and security. I like Drupal a lot but unless you have a huge in house PHP team already or you're not interested in ever utilizing any enterprise level features on your CMS, it is a mistake to use Drupal over Plone or an enterprise level CMS. It's all about the right tool for the right job...

  82. You have got to be kidding by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    So, let me get this straight. They've decided to go for open source so that they aren't locked in to a proprietary solution provider. Just to be clear: you live in a country that has no problem over-throwing their own government every 4 years, and in fact insists that it happen every 8 years, but refuses to rebuild their web-site ever again?

    How about this. How about every 4 years, when there's a new president, who proceeds to fire everybody, bring in his entire team, and spend six months appointing all sorts of other positions from scratch, how about he then, and only then, rebuilds the web-site -- you know, with new technologies and new ideas -- instead of leaving the 8-year-old web-site from the last administration to sit and grow dust.

    There are great reasons to benefit from an open source web-site. But I guarantee the following super ideas won't actually be put forward by anyone but me:
          - academic (school) assignments to improve a page of the country's web-site
          - national challenges to build interesting and useful public features
          - the olympics, for web developers -- you know, a task that actually has some value, unlike figure skating. Really, I think we've pushed ice-skate technology far enough. Even NASA can't find enough ice.
          - every government employee to build 1 web page
          - in order to apply for a government position, you must improve an existing web-page
          - national web-page development day! everybody program.
          - $100 of your annual income tax if you build a web page

    But, in the end, you know as well as I do:
          - fewer than 15 people will ever touch a single line of code for this thing
          - fewer than 50 people will ever generate any content for this thing -- CMS or not
          - it won't last 8 years
          - it won't last 4 years
          - it won't launch on-time
          - it won't launch complete
          - it won't ever reach initial completion
          - it'll suck. (that's a period my friends)
          - it won't help anyone with anything
          - it'll be marginally better than a computerized telephone answering machine
          - it'll be a waste of a lot of time
          - somehow it'll manage to cost tax payers way too much money
          - it won't create jobs. it won't save jobs. it won't improve the economy. it won't feed people. it won't save the auto industry. it won't save the oil industry.
          - it won't solve a single current actual problem

    Amazing how much easier it was to write that second list as compared to the first.

  83. They're a bit late to the party then.. by cheros · · Score: 1

    November 1999, Slashdot interview with "the Queen's webmaster".

    What happened since? The consultants moved in. Just in case you missed it, an Open solution doesn't bring in half as much money and customer lock in as proprietary solutions, so the door was thrown wide open to Microsoft based IT. "Come in, all is forgiven, we've relegated those nasty sandal wearing people to some unimportant jobs. Now, what were you saying about a nice position after I retire again? What? Naah, we don't need to to save money, it's TAXpayer's money. As long as we can sell a halfway plausible reason which it's not Open we'll be OK. Something like "not ready for industrial use" or something will do, I'm sure you can cook up some feasibility studies that "prove" that. We'll be nice to each other, won't we? Got any retiring people we can stick in the audit commission?

    I'm glad the administration is showing signs of intelligence here, but it's a mighty strong lobby..

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  84. Re:Why CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "you're admitting that you're not as good of a developer..."
    logic says he doesn't, failtroll.

  85. That's some good news! by janwedekind · · Score: 1

    When Obama's inauguration speech was published using Silverlight I thought that the Whitehouse IT had succumbed to Microsoft lobbying. So this actually good news for once. Lobbyists will have to be more careful in their rhetorics when arguing against free and open source software.

  86. Now time for videos... by abbe · · Score: 1

    Now lets hope they start publishing their videos from Adobe Flash to HTML5 VIDEO tag based on User-Agent strings. Looking forward to watch some Theora content from whitehouse.gov.

    --
    404 Not Found
  87. Re:okay, so you guys don't like Drupal's security. by HammerToe · · Score: 1

    Plone's security is much higher than Drupal's and most other PHP frameworks. For some stats and analysis see here:

    http://plonemetrics.blogspot.com/2009/04/plone-security.html

    Whilst the analysis will be a bit biased as it is by someone who uses Plone, the stats there are all independent.

    Alos both cia.gov and fbi.gov are Plone sites. Nuff said.

    -Matt

  88. Re:Why CMS by jbezorg · · Score: 1

    heh, I can see all the windows-1252 curved quotes showing up as garbage text even now...

    --
    I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
  89. Through? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Did you mean "throw"? It looks like that's what you meant but I'm not sure.

    1. Re:Through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't mention that word around me! You just gave me and the 1>>10 other Java programmers around here an exception. You know as well as I that betterunixthanunix was just trying to avoid using a reserved keyword.

  90. Re:Why CMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me relate a recent situation that happened to me. I was asked to come in and look at a proof-of-concept website that someone was designing for a customer. It was a reasonably impressive website that he showed us. He told us this POC took him about 100 hours to implement. The customer asked how long it would take to add certain features, particularly the ability for his staff to create pages on the fly without having to download files, modify them, and FTP them into place, and was told several hundred more hours.

    I suggested the site could be created using an existing CMS in significantly less time and with all the functionality they were looking for. I was asked to develop a POC as well using Drupal. I returned 48 hours later with a site that had everything the customer wanted, including the ability to easily add an ecommerce store at a later date.

    Who do you think has the contract now to build the site? Let me give you a hint... it isn't the guy who put 100 hours in.

  91. Re:There's more to it than your personal preferenc by yelvington · · Score: 1

    Oh, I was thinking of Varnish because:

    1. It's currently quite hot in the Drupal world.
    2. It's part of the secret Norwegian plan for world domination by proxy. Oh God, did I really say that?