Linux is Communism!

[Nils Kassube]

Basil Chupin wrote:
> On 29/12/2010 02:46, Samuel Thurston wrote:
> > For a long time there have been concerns by foreign governments
> > that MS has permitted "backdoors" for the various US intelligence
> > agencies.
> >   While I do not believe there is any legitimate evidence to
> > corroborate this theory, it is nonetheless a concern-- and
> > unfortunately there's no way to be sure in a sealed system like
> > windows.
> 
> Back on 16 December I posted an article, quote:
> 
> Backdoor code was allegedly added to the IPsec stack 10 years ago,
> giving the FBI secret ways to snoop on encrypted traffic
[...]
> If OpenBSD has/had one then you bet your family jewels that MS has
> one or two or three.

First of all, it isn't clear that there ever was a backdoor in the
OpenBSD IPsec stack. That is only an allegation and as long as the
person who made the allegation doesn't actually point to the code of
said backdoor, it might as well be FUD. The problem with backdoors is
that you can't easily prove their absence. While the IPsec code audit
didn't find any backdoor [1], that doesn't mean there is none. After all
we know about the famous Ken Thompson backdoor [2] which can't be found
by simply looking at the source code.

> >    Oftentimes governments require that MS pony up at least part
> > of their source as part of their licensing agreements.

That's a joke, isn't it? After all MS wouldn't allow them to compile the
source code with a trusted compiler in a trusted environment. The source
code need not be the same that was used for the executable. Therefore,
looking at some random source code is only a waste of time.


Nils

[1] <http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/OpenBSD-audits-give-no-indication-of-back-doors-1158604.html>
[2] <http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html>