Page 1 of 1
Secure Version of Windows Created for the U.S. Air Force
Posted: Sat 23 May 2009, 18:08
by Flash
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2 ... rsion.html
The NSA got together with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Defense Information Systems Agency and the Center for Internet Security to decide what to lock down in the Air Force special edition.
But of course those specifications are Top Secret, so that no one else can possibly compete with Microsoft in developing a secure OS. Another no-bid contract worth billions.
Posted: Sun 24 May 2009, 03:20
by kirk
Wow, that's bad. The USAF has to just take MS word that there's not a back door. I really doubt MS shared their source code. Hope it's not used for really top secret stuff.
Posted: Sun 24 May 2009, 03:36
by James C
"Secure Windows" is an oxymoron.
Posted: Tue 02 Jun 2009, 00:45
by droope
lol
Posted: Tue 02 Jun 2009, 17:05
by d4p
Windows is a bad choice for US gov't, esp the military!
Posted: Wed 02 Dec 2009, 20:48
by benali72
It's really scary that the USAF and various government agencies have decided upon Windows, rather than Secure Linux and other hardened forms of Linux.
Posted: Wed 02 Dec 2009, 21:35
by Wheres One
It truly is terrifying to know that the US government uses Windows in conjunction with important information. What was it, a while ago, that something like 11 terabytes of information was leaked?
Wheres One
Posted: Fri 04 Dec 2009, 02:33
by droope
It truly is terrifying to know that the US government uses Windows in conjunction with important information. What was it, a while ago, that something like 11 terabytes of information was leaked?
Wheres One
But then again, american people are always terrified, so...
(Just a joke, don't kill me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Posted: Fri 01 Jan 2010, 22:52
by dogle
Oxymoron, right. I've been missing out on this thread, but aficionados may while away an idle moment and perhaps raise a smile or three with the following gems from Vulture Towers:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/09/05 ... spymasters
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/20 ... oor_denial
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/05 ... ntegration
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/26 ... _standards
The one that breaks me heart is
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/05 ... s_type_23s
The poor 'ol Grey Funnel Line, lost its grog, losing its funnels and now facing the BSOD for real.
paranoid processing and beyond
Posted: Sat 02 Jan 2010, 16:03
by prehistoric
You might consider
my suggestion on the 48-core thread about where this is all heading. The military has a long history of distrusting individual judgment, so suggestions about plugging that gaping hole would be a natural for them.
Posted: Sun 03 Jan 2010, 00:18
by mikeb
Damn...how did they get hold of my windows install........
EULA?
Posted: Mon 04 Jan 2010, 23:11
by prehistoric
I've been waiting for someone on this topic to bring up the subject which leaped into my mind when I read the title. Guess I'll have to do it myself.
What did the EULA look like for that secure Windows system? Didn't they have something to say about "life-critical applications"? What about disclaimers of liability for consequential damages from: shooting down airliners, mistaking cruise liners for cruise missiles, or starting a nuclear war?
Posted: Tue 05 Jan 2010, 00:26
by technosaurus
Any OS is secure with the right firewall (that may or may not defeat the intended purpose).
