Open source security hypocrisy, fighting the digital thieves and Microsoft's attempt to close the digital divide is met with resistance Linux cult's security squabbles highlights hypocrisy

I had a few negative emails about my Linux paranoia column from 27 November. I read all of your comments, positive or negative, so keep them coming. I admit the majority of the responses were positive and one was a reasoned letter from an Internet firewall manufacturer who recognizes Linux is a good technology mired in a lack of marketing. The Linux problem has been less technological than ideological, because many hardcore Linux cult leaders and their followers are blatantly socialist ideologues. I don't have to tell you that socialism is a bad thing, but I will say that one of my personal beefs with socialism is its inherent hypocrisy. Hey, what squishy socialist moaning about the evils of money and capitalism isn't wealthy from a capitalistic enterprise? Ted Turner, you filthy capitalist businessman and private landowner, are you reading this?

The Linux cult has long flown their socialist colors, but this week we were witness to their most blatant hypocrisy. Ever since a Microsoft Windows security official published an essay on how Microsoft would like network security issues to be addressed, the Linux cultists have complained constantly.

Microsoft's contention is that bugs found in software should be addressed privately by the software maker rather than immediately printed on thousands of "security" websites on the World Wide Web. Hackers, using known Microsoft Outlook bugs described in detail on such security websites, created destructive email viruses like Melissa and Nimda. Microsoft would rather the security mavens wait before the detailed code of the software bug is published on the Internet so a fix can be found.

Upon hearing this news the Linux socialists, those self-appointed champions of the freedom of information on the Internet, repeated the tired "no security through obscurity" sound bite to every tech media outlet. The Linux cult believes that Microsoft does not fix Windows security flaws fast enough because Microsoft's proprietary code is unable to be seen by the public. Apparently these must be the same people that are convinced Saddam Hussein cannot possibly have weapons of mass destruction because he has allowed UN inspectors to come to Iraq in the past. Secrets, to the Linux cult, are an immoral way to maintain security.

Yes, that's exactly why when a serious security flaw was found in the most popular and widely used File Transfer Protocol (FTP) app for Linux servers was found this week, the majority of the Linux cult kept it a big secret. You see, the Linux cult believes that Microsoft should immediately publish their security flaws in the interest of openness and freedom. Yet when the wu-FTP Globbing Heap Corruption Vulnerability was found this week, the Linux cult agreed to keep it a secret until December 3rd so the major affected Linux distributions (over forty well-known Linux distributions from Debian, Mandrake, Red Hat and SuSE Linux), could work on a fix. However, Red Hat Linux published the full details of the security flaw on the Internet a week early, making it easier for hackers to exploit the bug. A senior engineering director for Red Hat Linux publicly apologized for publishing dangerous security flaws before all Linux distributions had time to release a fix. The apology was enough, I guess, since there was no talk of the flaw after that. Too bad nobody else saw the incredible hypocrisy of these Linux cultists telling Microsoft to be completely open about their flaws while sweeping their own bugs under the carpet.

Goodbye DeCSS and KaZaa - Hackers and digital thieves lose their free ride

Some much needed sanity regarding the illegal use of the Internet. Two court cases ended up with wins for consumers this week against hacker faves DeCSS and KaZaa. CSS is shorthand for the anti-piracy encryption placed on all commercial DVD movies sold around the world. DeCSS is the program written by a Norwegian teenager used to break the encryption and pirate thousands of copyrighted DVDs. KaZaa, a Napster-style Internet file-sharing program developed and maintained by a Dutch company, was where many web surfers could find many of these pirated DVD movies (along with hundreds of copyrighted songs and electronic books) for free.

When several copyright holders sued the hacker website 2600 for publishing the DeCSS code and the Dutch company hosting KaZaa's servers for copyright violations, the far left lawyers at the Electronic Frontier Foundation slithered into action. The EFF immediately painted the copyright holders (the victims in the case) into evil corporate interests only concerned about money and power, bent on destroying the right to freedom of speech for nice honest web surfers around the world (the thieves pirating DVDs and posting them on KaZaa). Fortunately, the leftist legal hotshots at the EFF couldn't even convince liberal judges in California and the Netherlands that these two technologies would be covered as free speech. When I asked legal expert David Limbaugh about why anyone would support technologies like Napster, KaZaa and DeCSS he remarked: "So many people Ñ even conservatives mindlessly defended this outright theft. It blew my mind, the extent to which even 'good' people are willing to rationalize to get things for free."

Mr. Limbaugh, like me, is shocked at how some will try to twist the liberties we all should cherish into an excuse to get free stuff. Fortunately the umbrella of free speech protections cannot protect thieves, even in wilds of cyberspace. The EFF has vowed to appeal. We can only hope that these lawyers don't keep appealing sensible rulings until they finally get a judge as nutty as they are.

Microsoft's attempt to close the digital divide is met with resistance

One of the more tech-oriented campaign platforms of the 2000 election was closing the gap between the digital haves and have-nots. This imaginary gap, the so-called "digital divide," separates low-income American kids with no access to personal computers from the middle-class and rich children that apparently all have PCs in the classrooms and homes. Both political parties sought to close this gap with government spending for new PCs in most inner city schools along with training programs on the latest software. Most of this talk got derailed after the evil attacks of September 11th but the issue never went away. Some on the political left who make their money off of this kind of class warfare, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, continue to beat the drum about the digital divide separating inner city African-American and Latinos from suburban whites.

Here's a thought: What if the largest software corporation in the world gave $1 billion to buy PC hardware and software for the USA's poorest inner city schools? Since brand-new computers are faster and cheaper than ever, $1 billion could potentially provide the latest technology in personal computers and software for every student in every inner city school in the twenty most populated urban areas in the US. We are talking millions of new desktop computers, the latest software and money left over for adequate training to use them for the kids who so desperately need it. With all of this technology and training, inner city kids that previously resigned themselves to a life of poverty or languishing in dead-end jobs could become high-wage earners in the tech economy. A $1 billon gift like that would close the gap in the digital divide, right?

It could happen, because Microsoft offered that very thing in a settlement of multiple civil suits filed against their "monopoly power abuses." Unfortunately, Apple, Sun, AOL, Oracle and a coalition of leftist trial lawyers are saying that this settlement will only further Microsoft's "abusive market power" by giving poor African-American and Latino children new computers with Windows XP. You read it right: Microsoft's effective closure of the gap between haves and have-nots in low-income urban schools is a conspiracy designed to further their evil monopoly. The same people on the left screaming for government and business to do more to help inner city kids get better jobs through technology now say: "Well, we didn't know the money was going to come from an evil corporation like Microsoft! That's dirty money!"

What a hoot! I'm mean, this is really as ridiculous as the conspiracy where the CIA was hooking inner city African-Americans on injectible crack cocaine and then genetically engineering AIDS in a chemical warfare lab to kill off these junkies with dirty needles! These companies complaining about Microsoft's $1 billion gift (which Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said could be used to buy non-Microsoft software if desired) are coming across as incredibly racist. In essence, these anti-Microsoft companies and lawyers are saying: "We wanted the digital divide to be bridged with old junky computers and a nice, fluffy suite of software apps that have no market share. This will look good on the outside, but would force inner city kids to learn obscure technology and keep them in their urban areas." Nothing is more racist that denying technology to inner city kids who so desperately need it. The men who should be most outraged are absent in this debate. Where are Jesse and Al? Don't these men want millions of urban youths to have the same technology and educational opportunities other children have? Why aren't these champions of equality chastising Microsoft's opponents for keeping much-needed computers and education from inner city African-American and Latino children?

Chew on that for a bit, kids. When you're done, email me with your comments: scott@worldtechtribune.com
<>

Print this Article

Email this article

Free Headline Alerts