DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding (US military shuns BSD)

[HarryAngel]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: Sunner
Immature/stupid/tactless or whatever you wanna call it, but you gotta respect Theo's integrity nevertheless.

I suppose so, but it sure wasn't very strategic of him.

Yes, big lack of strategery

could be a natural reason for this since its a no-no to funnel gov money to foreign researchers. might not have to do with his comments after all.

Earlier this week, de Raadt said he was told that officials from DARPA were concerned about statements appearing in press reports that indicated most of the grant was being funneled to foreign researchers, an apparent no-no for government-funded projects.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

His priorities aren't to the US government

No, but the $2M they offered to give him for his pet project should be one of his priorities, now not only has he lost that grant but he also has to pay for all the developers flying in out of his own pocket.

Principles are a good thing, and I applaud his courage to speak his mind, even when it costs him.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Bremen
Personally I never understood why DARPA funded OpenBSD to begin with. Yes it is a very secure OS used by many government departments, however on must remember our enemies recieve the same benefits as the US government. The defense department is not about parity with the enemy, it wants complete superiority. While doing this stuff in house may not be as efficient as funding OpenBSD it does ensure that enemies don't have access to US tech. So they have to do it themselves, thus leading to an arms race where american know-how will prevail, hopefully.

Because of the BSD license the government can use OpenBSD's source for whatever they want. We already shot ourselves in the foot by comparing crypto to missles, so a large part of the good development in that area comes from outside the US.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
2. Is there any evidence to support another possibility?

3. Noone said otherwise.

4. Depends. It seems apparent what Theo would choose and I admire him for his strong moral values, but I think most people in his situation wouldn't have acted the same way. If a large organization (gov't or not) was going to give you a large sum of money to do what you already do every day, would you insult them before you get to cash the check? I personally don't think it's a big compromise, it's not like they offered him a large sum of money and then said he could only collect if he started working on Linux instead. And before anyone says "but where do you draw the line", you have to take each situation individually, making blanket statements in any direction is stupid IMHO.

If his comment on how OpenBSD can be used in Aussie baby mulchers or whatever the hell it was did not offend anyone, then a little common sense to this whole American Empire thing shouldn't have either. Oh well, no one ever said our government should be intelligent about things.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: igiveup

And before anyone says "but where do you draw the line", you have to take each situation individually, making blanket statements in any direction is stupid IMHO.

I agree. When you are in charge of a project like Theo was/is you really shouldn't have an opionion (publicly) on matters that involve politics and do not directly affect your project. Personal opions yeah. Publicly voicing those opionions? Dumb. Real dumb.

His first duty should be to the project, not his political goals. It wasn't, now the former will suffer a bit.

His first priority should be to himself. If that means speaking his mind about whatever the F he wants, then he should do it. The project is just that, a project.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: Sunner
Immature/stupid/tactless or whatever you wanna call it, but you gotta respect Theo's integrity nevertheless.

I suppose so, but it sure wasn't very strategic of him.

Yes, big lack of strategery

I'm quoting this one instead of Spyro's post because I love the word stragergy.

Anyhow, he is a coder. They are not known for maturity, tact, or strategy. If he was a general, then he would need those things.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: HarryAngel

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: Sunner
Immature/stupid/tactless or whatever you wanna call it, but you gotta respect Theo's integrity nevertheless.

I suppose so, but it sure wasn't very strategic of him.

Yes, big lack of strategery

could be a natural reason for this since its a no-no to funnel gov money to foreign researchers. might not have to do with his comments after all.

Earlier this week, de Raadt said he was told that officials from DARPA were concerned about statements appearing in press reports that indicated most of the grant was being funneled to foreign researchers, an apparent no-no for government-funded projects.

If the US didn't castrate themselves in the security department by throwing something like this into the same category as this, or by creating crappy laws like the DMCA, we would not have to go to foreign developers. But, what can we do? The government is a short sighted POS at this point.

I wonder how much of the software used by the government is coded in foreign countries... I know of atleast one piece (not specifically gov software though).

 

[Nothinman]

Internet news sites love to interpret, speculate, and insinuate. I have no reason to believe any reason, because no hint of proof of any reason has been shown to me. I don't like to just assume things when there are lots of possibilities (e.g. govt cuts funding for things all the time, plus we are at war, etc etc)

Of course they do, but with Theo's reputation I don't hesitate to believe it this time.

I agree, and in alot of ways, that's ok. You can still hold your beliefs without spouting your mouth to newspapers, if some government organization was giving me lots of money, I would probably not run around publically bashing them. But on the other hand you can't really complain when people do, because without people like that, society as a whole would never be where it is today. So while you can perhaps say that he could have kept his mouth shut, I don't think you can really complain for him doing it.

I don't think I'm complaining about him doing that, if anything I just think he's an idiot for losing a lot of money and resources for his project.

If his comment on how OpenBSD can be used in Aussie baby mulchers or whatever the hell it was did not offend anyone, then a little common sense to this whole American Empire thing shouldn't have either. Oh well, no one ever said our government should be intelligent about things.

Him talking about Aussie baby mulchers didn't affect DARPA at the time because they weren't involved with him, I'm sure if they had offered the money before that statement it would have been recinded too.

Anyhow, he is a coder. They are not known for maturity, tact, or strategy. If he was a general, then he would need those things.

Whether he wants it or not he's a leader in addition to a coder.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Internet news sites love to interpret, speculate, and insinuate. I have no reason to believe any reason, because no hint of proof of any reason has been shown to me. I don't like to just assume things when there are lots of possibilities (e.g. govt cuts funding for things all the time, plus we are at war, etc etc)

Of course they do, but with Theo's reputation I don't hesitate to believe it this time.

I don't know if the story got out before he announced it, but I think he may have been the one making the initial speculation.

I agree, and in alot of ways, that's ok. You can still hold your beliefs without spouting your mouth to newspapers, if some government organization was giving me lots of money, I would probably not run around publically bashing them. But on the other hand you can't really complain when people do, because without people like that, society as a whole would never be where it is today. So while you can perhaps say that he could have kept his mouth shut, I don't think you can really complain for him doing it.

I don't think I'm complaining about him doing that, if anything I just think he's an idiot for losing a lot of money and resources for his project.

Again, why place money over your conscience?

If his comment on how OpenBSD can be used in Aussie baby mulchers or whatever the hell it was did not offend anyone, then a little common sense to this whole American Empire thing shouldn't have either. Oh well, no one ever said our government should be intelligent about things.

Him talking about Aussie baby mulchers didn't affect DARPA at the time because they weren't involved with him, I'm sure if they had offered the money before that statement it would have been recinded too.

Maybe. But they went into the funding of University of Pennsylvania knowing full well what they were getting themselves into. They got their panties in a wad and are now losing some great work because of it. Stuffy bureaucratic BS.

Anyhow, he is a coder. They are not known for maturity, tact, or strategy. If he was a general, then he would need those things.

Whether he wants it or not he's a leader in addition to a coder.

Probably, and if DARPA didn't want someone that spoke his mind, they should have gotten into another OS. Of course, I don't know of one off hand that doesn't have an asshole as a "leader."

 

[Nothinman]

Again, why place money over your conscience?

Because to me it's trivial and wouldn't affect my conscience. IMHO if has 'just a coder' his pet project would be more important than pissing on the gov't.

Probably, and if DARPA didn't want someone that spoke his mind, they should have gotten into another OS. Of course, I don't know of one off hand that doesn't have an asshole as a "leader."

I'm sure it's not the act of speaking his mind that's the problem, it's what comes out of his mouth, gov't depts are strangely sensitiveto things like that. I wouldn't call Linus an asshole, he doesn't always agree with people but he's usually very 'diplomatic' about things.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Again, why place money over your conscience?

Because to me it's trivial and wouldn't affect my conscience. IMHO if has 'just a coder' his pet project would be more important than pissing on the gov't.

Expressing your opinions about world affairs is not, in my opinion, pissing on the government. I do not think he did it out of spite, and I personally read some of the comments as more of a tongue in cheek comment. The "grab for oil" comment seems to have just been thrown in there for sensationalism on the part of the author.

Probably, and if DARPA didn't want someone that spoke his mind, they should have gotten into another OS. Of course, I don't know of one off hand that doesn't have an asshole as a "leader."

I'm sure it's not the act of speaking his mind that's the problem, it's what comes out of his mouth, gov't depts are strangely sensitiveto things like that.

Instea of watching what he does, they only watch what he says. I thought they were giving the money to University of Pennsylvania for the POSSE program to see what kind of code developments came out of it. Maybe this was more of a psychology experiment to see how long it takes a politician to get offended at what the world thinks about the actions of the US military regime.

I wouldn't call Linus an asshole, he doesn't always agree with people but he's usually very 'diplomatic' about things.

He may use nicer words and care more about the image of Linux than Theo does, but it all comes down to one thing: Linus speaks his mind. Using diplomacy is like selling used cars. It sounds great, but you have to realize it is all just smoke being blown up your rear.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Even though this is the topic of my posts so far, I don't think DARPA is doing something bad or shady or whatever here. I do not blame them for pulling the funding, or putting it under review, or whatever they are actually doing with the money. If he was a major employee making comments like that he would be reprimanded and possibly terminated (his employment, this isn't the NSA). But, I do think they are being idiots in the grand scheme of things. These OpenBSD developers are the only group doing these things. Yeah, some of these changes make it to other systems, and hell, some were developed on other systems (systrace was for both Open and NetBSD in the beginning I think, and propolice was probably developed on Linux), but who is putting these parts together along with everything else?

What system has a list of things like the following:
systrace
non-exec heap (on supported hardware platforms)
non-exec stack (on supported hardware platforms)
chrooted apache
chrooted bind
removing dangerous calls (sprintf(), strcpy(), and strcat())
W^X (on supported hardware platforms)
ProPolice

Along with some of the other things that have made it into OpenBSD earlier than many other systems:
IPv6
OpenSSH (thanks to some great developers of OpenBSD and other software!)
ISAKMPD
sudo

Anyone? I am not saying that this makes OpenBSD better in any way (no matter what my personal opinion is on the subject ). But, OpenBSD is a great platform for these developments. It follows the tradition of the original BSD in that it has been great for development, education, and over all use. The developer of ProPolice (an employee of IBM) was in the loop while the ProPolice work was going on in OpenBSD. In fact, since this was one of the first areas ProPolice was getting a good work out, they happened to find and help fix quite a few bugs (in both ProPolice and OpenBSD I believe). I think Gentoo now has ProPolice, but would this kind of development really work on a Linux distro? Maybe RedHat who has the money to put into it, or Debian that has the fanatical following, but on Gentoo? No offence meant to the users and developers, but I don't think they have the time or really the vision.

Anyhow, DARPA did not necessarily do anything wrong, no matter how much I want to yell and scream that they should all die for stupid crap like this. I just think they are being obtuse about the whole situation.

Wow, I think I am giving this little message reply box at the bottom of the thread a nice work out

 

[Nothinman]

Expressing your opinions about world affairs is not, in my opinion, pissing on the government. I do not think he did it out of spite, and I personally read some of the comments as more of a tongue in cheek comment. The "grab for oil" comment seems to have just been thrown in there for sensationalism on the part of the author.

That makes it even worse then. Tongue in cheek comments and sensationalism at the cost of $2M?

Instea of watching what he does, they only watch what he says.

And this surprises you?

He may use nicer words and care more about the image of Linux than Theo does, but it all comes down to one thing: Linus speaks his mind. Using diplomacy is like selling used cars. It sounds great, but you have to realize it is all just smoke being blown up your rear.

And that's part of being a leader. When someone doen't agree with you, you can't just say "f' off, it's my project" and expect people to keep contributing because eventually you'll piss everyone off. Look at Andre Hedrick, knows the Linux IDE layer, and IDE storage and all it's quirks, better than anyone else on the LKML but noone wants to deal with him because he's so much of an asshole. Multiple people have tried to rip out his IDE code and replace it so they can be rid of him but noone can get as stable a system as him, he's a necessary evil that probably wouldn't be able to be involved with OpenBSD because Theo and him would never get anything done.

(on supported hardware platforms)

The best part is that "supported hardware platforms" doesn't include x86, the most common platform by far. And I've heard that these protections break some things like debuggers and JIT compilers, but I guess Java isn't very important to Theo =)

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Expressing your opinions about world affairs is not, in my opinion, pissing on the government. I do not think he did it out of spite, and I personally read some of the comments as more of a tongue in cheek comment. The "grab for oil" comment seems to have just been thrown in there for sensationalism on the part of the author.

That makes it even worse then. Tongue in cheek comments and sensationalism at the cost of $2M?

Look at the publicity he has gotten. The big bad US government has punished a foreigner by taking away funding because of his personal opinion on the war. You know some people are looking at it like that.

Instea of watching what he does, they only watch what he says.

And this surprises you?

Not at all.

He may use nicer words and care more about the image of Linux than Theo does, but it all comes down to one thing: Linus speaks his mind. Using diplomacy is like selling used cars. It sounds great, but you have to realize it is all just smoke being blown up your rear.

And that's part of being a leader. When someone doen't agree with you, you can't just say "f' off, it's my project" and expect people to keep contributing because eventually you'll piss everyone off. Look at Andre Hedrick, knows the Linux IDE layer, and IDE storage and all it's quirks, better than anyone else on the LKML but noone wants to deal with him because he's so much of an asshole. Multiple people have tried to rip out his IDE code and replace it so they can be rid of him but noone can get as stable a system as him, he's a necessary evil that probably wouldn't be able to be involved with OpenBSD because Theo and him would never get anything done.

Maybe. But, if he is a good coder, don't worry about his personality. Worry about the code.

(on supported hardware platforms)

The best part is that "supported hardware platforms" doesn't include x86, the most common platform by far.

It is a hardware limitation in much of it. So don't try insulting the OpenBSD guys because of Intel. x86 will be going ELF post 3.3, so that should help with the rest of it. I still think sparc is the development platform of choice for Theo.

And I've heard that these protections break some things like debuggers and JIT compilers, but I guess Java isn't very important to Theo =)

Its possible. Sun kind of ignores OpenBSD, even in the JAVA arena. I haven't had a chance to play around with any of it, so I can't really comment.

 

[addragyn]

Idiocy.

The mission comes first indeed.

 

[Nothinman]

Look at the publicity he has gotten. The big bad US government has punished a foreigner by taking away funding because of his personal opinion on the war. You know some people are looking at it like that.

And I'm sure some people don't think the gov't should be funding foreigners at all, in the first place.

Maybe. But, if he is a good coder, don't worry about his personality. Worry about the code.

A good coder with a bad personallity will eventually be a lone coder.

It is a hardware limitation in much of it. So don't try insulting the OpenBSD guys because of Intel. x86 will be going ELF post 3.3, so that should help with the rest of it. I still think sparc is the development platform of choice for Theo.

I know it's a hardware limitation, but that hardware is the most common hardware world-wide. It appears to me that Theo really prefers sparc also.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Look at the publicity he has gotten. The big bad US government has punished a foreigner by taking away funding because of his personal opinion on the war. You know some people are looking at it like that.

And I'm sure some people don't think the gov't should be funding foreigners at all, in the first place.

I can see that, but I stick by my point earlier where I think our government has shot itself in the foot.

Maybe. But, if he is a good coder, don't worry about his personality. Worry about the code.

A good coder with a bad personallity will eventually be a lone coder.

Quite possibly. Fortunately, others see the benefit in what Theo envisions in OpenBSD.

It is a hardware limitation in much of it. So don't try insulting the OpenBSD guys because of Intel. x86 will be going ELF post 3.3, so that should help with the rest of it. I still think sparc is the development platform of choice for Theo.

I know it's a hardware limitation, but that hardware is the most common hardware world-wide.

Hammer should solve that

It appears to me that Theo really prefers sparc also.

That was what he was doing for NetBSD before they got tired of his attitude.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: addragyn
Idiocy.

The mission comes first indeed.

What mission?

 

[Nothinman]

I can see that, but I stick by my point earlier where I think our government has shot itself in the foot.

And so has Theo.

Quite possibly. Fortunately, others see the benefit in what Theo envisions in OpenBSD.

His visions aren't the problem, a man can be brilliant and still be impossible to work with.

Hammer should solve that

So should Sparc, Alpha and IA-64 too. Hammer has more potential than them, but it all depends on pricing.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I can see that, but I stick by my point earlier where I think our government has shot itself in the foot.

And so has Theo.

Quite possibly. Fortunately, others see the benefit in what Theo envisions in OpenBSD.

His visions aren't the problem, a man can be brilliant and still be impossible to work with.

Apparently he is not impossible to work with.

Hammer should solve that

So should Sparc, Alpha and IA-64 too. Hammer has more potential than them, but it all depends on pricing.

Sparc64 could do it, if Sun would be an open company like they say and give the OpenBSD guys some docs. Unless I missed something, Alpha is reaching an EOL cycle. IA-64 sucked last time I checked, prices are extraordinarily high, and is pretty much all SMP.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winnar! I'm too lazy to figure out who it was at the moment though.

Update.

EDIT: It was Bremen! He gets the paranoia just isn't enough, so let's stifle growth in the name of protection award!

 

[n0cmonkey]

And here we have an act of malice against the OpenBSD developers, not just the withdraw of funding. It is DARPA's money, they should have some say with what it goes towards, but this is pretty effing low.

 

[Sunner]

Wow, now THAT sure sucks.

Basically they're saying they'd rather flush the money down the drain, than let someone get something out of it, and for no reason.
And that this someone would indirectly give them something back(seeing as parts of the US govmnt uses OBSD) doesn't make it any better.

That's the biggest

ever.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Wow, now THAT sure sucks.

Basically they're saying they'd rather flush the money down the drain, than let someone get something out of it, and for no reason.
And that this someone would indirectly give them something back(seeing as parts of the US govmnt uses OBSD) doesn't make it any better.

That's the biggest

ever.

Not just OpenBSD! OpenBSD developers have also helped with: X, OpenSSH, OpenSSL, Apache, etc.

 

[addragyn]

What mission?

Better software.

The simplistic irony is the US military is by nature tasked with protecting the US constitution and the First Amendment is...

Financially it's ridiculous. A few million isn't a drop in the military budget and since BSD came out of a public university and has matured relatively well it's assinine to not continue investing in it. Especially in today's technological climate. The .gov or even .mil could easily get BSD to a place where it meant better security for America and probably cost savings too.