FSF Responds To Microsoft's Privacy and Encryption Announcement 174
Posted
by
Soulskill
from the no-trust-without-verification dept.
from the no-trust-without-verification dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft announced yesterday their plans to encrypt customer data to prevent government snooping. Free Software Foundation executive director John Sullivan questions the logic of trusting non-free software, regardless of promises or even intent. He says, 'Microsoft has made renewed security promises before. In the end, these promises are meaningless. Proprietary software like Windows is fundamentally insecure not because of Microsoft's privacy policies but because its code is hidden from the very users whose interests it is supposed to secure. A lock on your own house to which you do not have the master key is not a security system, it is a jail. ... If the NSA revelations have taught us anything, it is that journalists, governments, schools, advocacy organizations, companies, and individuals, must be using operating systems whose code can be reviewed and modified without Microsoft or any other third party's blessing. When we don't have that, back doors and privacy violations are inevitable.'"
PR Stunt at best (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Predictable (Score:5, Interesting)
>> I don't honestly believe that people would actually compile all their tools from source code they've reviewed personally to check for security holes
We do use some open source in our aviation products. We are required to heavily review literally every line of source code (both ours and open source) in order to get our product certified for aircraft use.
Too many preachers open source code = nanny state (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Why is free software immune? (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux (and BSD) committers are just as identifiable. Although the codebase is open to all, very few people go through it. If it follows the documented coding style, compiles, and "works", there is simply no reason to keep reviewing it — for most people. The Debian hole [slashdot.org] I cited earlier remained open from 2006 to 2013 — more years, than Turing spent working on Enigma.
Maybe, but I would not count on it. Which country would you consider unlikely to cooperate with the US on such matter — without itself being an even greater threat to liberty (like China or Cuba)? The entire Western world's spooks cooperate with the US. As does Russia [whitehouse.gov] — to some extent [dailymail.co.uk], at least. Who would not help their American colleagues in exchange for Americans helping them — a little? Someone like Sweden? Well, they did hit Assange with rape [wikipedia.org] charges, when he made himself an overly tiresome nuisance to the Americans...
In other words, Microsoft, probably, was coerced into it. A similar coercion — or conviction, or fooling — can be applied to an open-source project's participant. Whether it is easier or harder to do, I would not know.