|
Posted by on August 21, 2007, 10:02 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> That it is, and the NSA has SElinux to facilitate its spying.
> At least, we think it facilitates its spying. I can't tell
> for sure from here, and in any event its patches are now
> part of every Linux kernel and hopefully someone's reviewed
> them by now.
I had no idea the spooks had put code into the
kernel. When did those get put in? And where is the code?
And why would Linus et al tolerate such a thing?
|
|
Posted by Michael Black on August 21, 2007, 10:51 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
(plenty560@yahoo.com) writes:
>> That it is, and the NSA has SElinux to facilitate its spying.
>> At least, we think it facilitates its spying. I can't tell
>> for sure from here, and in any event its patches are now
>> part of every Linux kernel and hopefully someone's reviewed
>> them by now.
>
> I had no idea the spooks had put code into the
> kernel. When did those get put in? And where is the code?
> And why would Linus et al tolerate such a thing?
>
It's the "NSA patch", that's like a trojan horse because it's promoted
as adding security to the kernel. So the believer adds the patch, and
whamo! their hooked into the NSA's secret sub-net, passing their secrets
directly to the NSA.
What I don't understand is that this is the second post in a month
or so (that I've seen) where someone has suggested that Linux is
a security risk in terms of government or maybe business.
The first time, I thought it was just a conspiracy nut, but seeing
a second message makes me think this is just another one of those
posts to cast doubt on LInux.
Michael
|
|
Posted by xpyttl on August 21, 2007, 11:08 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options > (plenty560@yahoo.com) writes:
> The first time, I thought it was just a conspiracy nut, but seeing
> a second message makes me think this is just another one of those
> posts to cast doubt on LInux.
Well, OP was asking about Flash, which perhaps might be something to be
concerned about. It's a little easier to feel warm and fuzzy about open
source code, a little less so when a M$ partner is supplying closed code.
..
|
|
Posted by Thufir on August 21, 2007, 8:55 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:51:54 +0000, Michael Black wrote:
> It's the "NSA patch", that's like a trojan horse because it's promoted
> as adding security to the kernel. So the believer adds the patch, and
> whamo! their hooked into the NSA's secret sub-net, passing their secrets
> directly to the NSA.
Those sneaky bastards ;)
-Thufir
|
|
Posted by on August 22, 2007, 8:37 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options On Aug 21, 10:51 am, et...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) wrote:
> It's the "NSA patch", that's like a trojan horse because it's promoted
> as adding security to the kernel. So the believer adds the patch, and
> whamo! their hooked into the NSA's secret sub-net, passing their secrets
> directly to the NSA.
The way it was phrased I assumed that that the patch
had made it into the kernel tarball, but if not then
that's fine.
However, I suppose it is conceivable that some spook
has infiltrated the Linux project and has placed clever
vulnerabilities into the kernel. Is there any evidence of that?
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox? | August 20, 2007, 10:52 pm |
| Re: Non-Adobe flash player for Firefox? | August 21, 2007, 6:37 am |
| Want to find a file encryption solution on USB flash drive | June 28, 2007, 9:42 am |
| A look at Firefox 2.0 RC2 | October 9, 2006, 9:54 pm |
| Firefox and Window Washer | November 26, 2004, 8:34 am |
| Spybot S&D can't see my Firefox cookies | December 17, 2004, 10:10 pm |
| the favourities file of Firefox | December 21, 2004, 4:39 pm |
| Where does Firefox store it's bookmarks? | March 26, 2005, 6:25 pm |
| The Pros and Cons of Firefox | April 20, 2005, 5:52 pm |
| New Firefox Version Avariable | July 13, 2005, 5:31 pm |
|