Soldiers Renege on Hackers
by Ian F. Darwin04/18/2003
Editor's note -- The following is an editorial by O'Reilly author and UNIX old-timer Ian Darwin who comments on DARPA cutting funding to the OpenBSD project.
Long before there was an agency called DARPA, there was a US Military with attitude. One day in the 1960's, a five-star general happened to be making a surprise inspection of computer systems deep under Cheyenne Mountain near Colorado Springs, CO.
In those days computers were slow, very slow by today's standards. So programmers would occasionally print out chatty little messages just so they'd know the program hadn't crashed. Many of the programs were provided by defense contractors, and some of the programmers were, well, not from a military background. A hardcopy terminal (IBM golf-ball typewriter style, very noisy) abruptly started typing near the general, so he walked over to see what it was saying. His face went red with rage, and he started bellowing, and he looked likely to explode. It turned out the console had printed the message "Ban the Bomb". The unlucky programmer was, apparently, on a one-way flight to a DEW-line (Distant Early Warning, cold war) RADAR station in Alaska, before sunset that day.
Fast forward to 2003, at the sunset (we hope) of the invasion of Iraq by American troops. DARPA, which funded the development of the Internet, has recently been very good about funding Open Source projects. Its funding for OpenBSD, as part of the University of Pennsylvania's POSSE project, has been reported in numerous media, one of the first being Soldiers Meet Hackers on O'Reilly's ONLamp.com. In Canada's Globe and Mail for April 6th, 2003, the project's irrepressible and outspoken leader Theo de Raadt is quoted as saying:
"I actually am fairly uncomfortable about it, even if our firm stipulation was that they cannot tell us what to do. We are simply doing what we do anyways - securing software - and they have no say in the matter," Mr. de Raadt said in a recent e-mail exchange. "I try to convince myself that our grant means a half of a cruise missile doesn't get built."
Was de Raadt sent to Alaska the same day? No. Perhaps it takes a bit longer for the Globe and Mail to reach the corridors of power deep under the Pentagon. A few days later he was told "that there were people inside DARPA and UPenn who were very uncomfortable with the article, but I was not told specifically what upset them." And on April 16th, de Raadt was informed by UPenn that all funding was being cut by DARPA, effective immediately, and that no explanation was given.
This cutting of funding for "foreign" hackers comes at an interesting time in Canada-US relations. While Canada (with British help) burned the White House back in the War of 1812, relations have generally been good. Many Canadians fought in the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, but four were killed in a so-called "friendly fire" incident when US warplanes bombed a Canadian training exercise. Partly as a result of this, Canada chose not to take part in the US-led invasion of Iraq. And because of this (and because of some very stupid comments made by Canadian government ministers and not disowned by the Prime Minister), relations between the two neighbors have been a bit strained lately.
The timing couldn't come at a worse time for Theo. For months he has been organizing a "hackathon", where many of the OpenBSD project's hundred or so volunteer developers get together in Calgary (where de Raadt and several other senior developers live) for a week of intensive hacking (and beer and camaraderie). Most of the sixty or so who are coming have bought their own discount, non-refundable airline tickets to this event. Funding for the lodging at this event was coming from the UPenn DARPA funds. De Raadt writes: "since DARPA is now forcing UPenn to cancel those Hotel accommodations, I would be very grateful if anyone can find a way to help us. I'm going to need to pay for it myself, since these people are going to come."
Was it Theo's comments that killed it? Or, as some have suggested, just a post-war budget cutback? If it weren't intended to make a point, the funding cut could have been done after the hackathon. Goodness knows the US Government has the resources to fund the thing. So this columnist concludes that DARPA has chosen to make an issue of de Raadt's comments. It's the modern equivalent of that one-way ticket to the DEW line.
Ian F. Darwin has worked in the computer industry for three decades: with Unix since 1980, Java since 1995, and OpenBSD since 1998. He is the author of two O'Reilly books, Checking C Programs with lint and Java Cookbook, and co-author of Tomcat: The Definitive Guide with Jason Brittain.
Return to ONLamp.com.
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.
Showing messages 1 through 30 of 30.
-
US don't keep up their promises (Do they at least once make it ?)
2003-04-23 10:56:22 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
What is beeing missing here is that OpenBSD doesn't need DARPA funds to keep running, the problem is that there was a conference already setted ,including confirmed by UPENN that would handle part of the costs and that runned away , letting half-world with tha paints in the hands.(60 programmers from all over the world that had already bought air tickets , to help systems (including many US govs and militaries ones) get even more secure). It was a promise that was broken(so to speak, one more promise that in not fulfilled by US gov). I think we should start to do the same with US and stop maintaining their little glass dome!!. And remember : who remain silent ,concents!
-
It's obviously one more US-We do what we want in the world- reaction
2003-04-22 08:42:11 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Just to let some stupids guys comments here , US Military forces USES OpenBSD because itīs the most secure OS around.The conference (not a hacks simple meeting to drink beers!)had more enhancements to add to this fabulous OS (including with help of some native US developers programmers that works with Theo).But you know, actually US forces and governament pray to the world : Or you are my carpet or you are my enemy. They are so stupid that now they even can downgrade to a worst solution just to Say we don't use you OS anymooooreeee!.How foolish.But what let these guys crazy is that in fact OBSD project never needed US money and never will need in order to continue to exist and if any more money is needed , I think there are a role bunch of Countries, how would like to help this great project instead of beeing looking after Saddam, Osama , Woolie , Elvis and etc...
-
Can I get the goverment to fund my hax0r con too?
2003-04-22 02:15:04 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Perhaps that is why the funding was canceled, the frivilous and wastefull use of the monies for no prupose other then to throw a big party for ex-w00w00ers. -
Can I get the goverment to fund my hax0r con too?
2003-04-22 09:43:08 Ian F. Darwin [Reply | View]
If you wouldn't mind reading the article, you'd see that I described it as "a week of intensive hacking (and beer and camaraderie).". This is hacking in the good sense: coding and refactoring, not trying to crack into systems.
Oh, and the attendees pay for their own beer.
-
Attention to detail
2003-04-21 11:08:00 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Hail:
Mr. Darwin's piece is an opinion article and therefore perhaps less subject to the rigors of sticking to the truth. The article starts off with a story of way back in the sixties and there in lies a problem.
I will quote from the opening of the article:
"Long before there was an agency called DARPA, there was a US Military with attitude. One day in the 1960's, a five-star general happened to be making a surprise inspection of computer systems deep under Cheyenne Mountain near Colorado Springs, CO. . . ."
The author implies that US DoD funding was cut to OpenBSD project because of statements in "The Globe and Mail" made by Theo de Raadt the OpenBSD leader.
In my opinion Mr. Darwin's piece highlights a problem common to most current writing about the military, sloppy understanding of the basics. In current [incorrect] parlance every warship becomes a battleship, members of the Marine Corps become solders, third class petty officers become naval officers, the crews manning ships become solders, all generals have five star rank and apparently every member of the military (current and former) is engaged in a plot or cover up.
When I see this kind of sloppy usage it causes me to suspect the other points an author is trying to make. If they can't get the easy stuff right why should I believe their conclusions about the hard stuff?
Oh in case you are wondering the last person to be appointed to Five Star rank in the US Military was General of the Army Bradley in 1950. By the 1960's the US five star Flag Officers were not active and it is highly unlikely that they would have been "making a surprise inspection of computer systems" anywhere.
As to Mr. Darwin's apparent point it is unlikely that a military officer made the decision to cut funding to the OpenBSD project, more likely is was some civilian in the US DoD looking for ways to stay on budget. Was that decision short sighted, probably; was it stupid, possibly; was it based on malicious intent to get even with Mr. de Raadt, unlikely (maybe highly unlikely).
-
Attention to detail
2003-04-22 08:34:26 Ian F. Darwin [Reply | View]
The n-star general is an example of a common literary device known as hyperbole.
As for whether the unkind cut was malice or budget, maybe the truth will out someday someday, or maybe not.
-
Free choice works, Theo got what he deserves!!!
2003-04-21 08:58:27 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
The only thing I hate more than liberal politians is liberal geeks.
The military can (and now will) spend its money how it fucking pleases.
If Theo got his little feelings hurt, boo-fucking-hoo. For christ sake the punk is canadian, and history has shown the canadians to be pussies on the scale of the french.
Get a life you bunch of liberal losers!!!
PS. Its ok with me if we drop a JDAM on Theo!!! -
Free choice works, Theo got what he deserves!!!
2003-04-22 08:15:38 Ian F. Darwin [Reply | View]
> The only thing I hate more than liberal politians is liberal geeks.
See that thing called TCP/IP? It was developed at Berkeley. With DARPA funding. If you dislike "liberal geeks", just stop using a computer.
>PS. Its ok with me if we drop a JDAM on Theo!!!
The other anonymous poster who implied that this anonymous poster cares about "civilization" was quite obviously mistaken. -
Here's a hint, clueless rifleboy...
2003-04-21 23:28:36 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
See that thing around you called "civilization?" It's designed and maintained by the liberal geeks you hate so much. You think the military can do what it please, huh? Let's find out. Let's call a national general strike for anyone with graduate degrees.
I'd give that civilization you like so much and depend on about... mmmm...10-15 days before it was in complete global collapse.
Go back to cleaning your rifle, and stay out of the stuff that requires thinking. We're tired of the neanderthals running the show. You see, slowly over the last couple of years, you right-wing freaks made a huge error. You made people start paying attention to the crap you've been pulling. Payback time is scheduled. November 2004. Know that date and live it. That's the last day you reactionaries ever set foot in a US government policy office again. -
OMG. Take your meds.
2003-05-20 22:06:48 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Hmmm... civilization is built by grad students (who would show up for your loser retread of John Galt?) Uh, ok. Hmmm, who has accomplished more? Grad Students or the founders of Ford, US Steel, and Standard Oil, General Curtis LeMay or your favorite bete noir, GWB? Yeah, those guys were real lefty radicals back when they were jockeying for favor with the Department Head for grant money.
Oh, and it's really classic that you think political fortunes will be reversed the first time "the people" get to vote on the matter. That will be in 2002 -Oh wait.
-
people whining about Theo's big mouth
2003-04-19 12:54:33 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I am so sick of this! Everyone know that the most dangerous person in charge of anything is the least qualified. Disagree with an opinion of theirs, and you're taking your economic well-being into your own hands. Those idiots that pulled the funding are probably the very same people that would do ANYTHING to hold onto their positions, Else, they'd be asking "Would you like freedom fries with that?"
Remember, just because they're in charge, doesn't mean thy're intelligent. I can't think of any reason an intelligent person would become involved in politics, other than to expose them for the inept flunkies they are, or to just generally clean house.
Hack on, Theo. Keep up the good work.
-
No five star generals
2003-04-19 09:07:26 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
There were no five star generals in the 1960. -
No five star generals
2003-04-22 08:10:31 Ian F. Darwin [Reply | View]
Yes, this point has been made. Mea Culpa!
I think the story still stands if you read it as
"N-Star General (where n <= NMAX sub 1960)"
--Ian -
No five star generals
2003-04-29 04:05:30 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
so how about documenting your source on that fine little anecdote? -
No five star generals
2006-05-31 13:23:24 Airman_from_Maine [Reply | View]
Unless I missed something there were a total of 4 Five Star Generals/Admirals still alive in 1960. Gen. Omar N. Bradley was the last general to receive the 5th star (1950) and also the last to die (1981). Technically he was on active duty when he died and was usually present at Presidential Inaugurations.
Below is a list of Names, Date of Rank, Date of Death
NAME DATE OF RANK DIED
Adm. William D. Leahy Dec. 15, 1944 07-20-1959
Gen. George C. Marshall Dec. 16, 1944 10-16-1959
Adm. Ernest J. King Dec. 17, 1944 06-25-1956
Gen. Douglas MacArthur Dec. 18, 1944 04-05-1965
Adm. Chester Nimitz Dec. 19, 1944 02-20-1966
Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower Dec. 20, 1944 03-28-1969
Gen. Henry H. Arnold Dec. 21, 1944 01-15-1950
Adm. Willliam F. Halsey Dec. 11, 1945 07-20-1959
Gen. Omar N. Bradley Sep. 20, 1950 04-08-1981
-
Friendly Fire isn't the only issue unresolved...
2003-04-19 08:34:52 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Try softwood lumber agreement... Probably none of the tech savvy people out there have heard but it's big news here in B.C. The yankee gov't claims that Canada is funding forestry which would be against NAFTA. This is a misunderstanding. The majority of land in Canada is owned by the government. So when loggers go out to cut down trees, there doing it on "Crown Land." Because they are taking something of value from the land the government charges them a fee based on the amount of wood that they get. As seems reasonable the government can charge whatever they like. Across the 49th, land is privately owned and bid upon by different companies so this stumpage fee is often quite higher than it is in Canada, however washington actually provides cash for road-building to the land (loggers have to build their own roads in Canada). So it could be said that the opposite is true. This does nothing to stop the yanks from charging close to 30% tarrif (which gets given to the american lumber industry) with plans to raise it to close to 50%. The NAFTA oversight body, the WTO, and other applicable world bodies as well as the US courts agree that this is against the free trade agreement between our two great nations, but does it change american policy? Nope, they take whatever they like, whenever they like, from whoever they like. That's why I as a Canadian am against they war in Iraq. You say it's not about oil but where's the weapons of mass distruction? Why don't you want to make use of the international community in rebuilding Iraq? "I am sick and tired of lies and deception!" (-- GW Bush on Hussein) -- Chris Moore on american international terrorism.
-
Worst Enemy
2003-04-19 06:14:37 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Perhaps in a few weeks DARPA/USAF will feel they have gotten their message accross to Theo (Don't bite the hand that feeds you, especially when the hand belongs to a very large gorilla), and restore funding.
This is a no-win situation for all involved. There are probably people in the USAF who went 'ballistic' upon learning the funding got cut off, and will work to get the deal straightened out.
Once all is back to normal, they will use Theo's own words and ask him to please: "Shut up, and hack."
-
Petty, Petty
2003-04-19 04:40:36 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Although I have no sympathy for Theo (if you get in bed with the Man, you have to watch your pillow-talk), it's simply childish to pull the plug on a good project which gives concrete benefit to the U.S. in a fit of personal pique. Then again, some full grown senators care more about such things as "French" fries than about national debt, so we shouldn't expect much from Washington during this period of hysteria.
-
Theo's big mouth
2003-04-19 01:14:48 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Theo's big mouth gets him in trouble again. Doesn't he know that it is OK to have an unexpressed opinion? Especially before the Hackathon! It's just not prudent, whether it is fair or not. I do not feel sorry for him.
-
Madonna comments on OpenBSD
2003-04-18 22:58:24 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
"You know, it's ironic we're fighting for democracy in Iraq because we ultimately aren't celebrating democracy here," Madonna said. "Because anybody who has anything to say against the war or against the president or whatever is punished, and that's not democracy" -
Madonna comments on OpenBSD
2003-04-29 04:12:31 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
"punished"? Strange, I haven't seen any government sponsored spanking squads. Everyone seems to think the US government is some huge tool of oppression. I see no reason for the government to financially support an institution whose leader doesn't support US policy. That doesn't mean the government should shut down or punish the organization, and they don't.
For every action there is and equal and opposite reaction.
-
What a shame!
2003-04-18 22:24:46 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
It's just shameful of funding being cut if DARPA and associates can't handle general critcism by the people working on a grant from DARPA.
It's even more amazing that it was also DARPA with which help foundations of Internet was layed. If it was not that, funding cut would not have been felt so sever by this American.
- Parv
-
It just proves...
2003-04-18 18:52:19 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
...that you can't trust the government.
http://www.lp.org
-
It just proves...
2003-04-21 10:48:39 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
....that you can't trust the government because the governmen't is not a trusting entity. Why should the US government trust hackers from a foreign country to develop code to be used by it's military systems. It is a huge concession for DARPA to even allow the use of code developed by a Canadian based company. Let's face the facts, if you do not play by the rules, you will be punished. -
It just proves...
2003-04-25 03:44:52 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
"Why should the US government trust hackers from a foreign country to develop code to be used by it's military systems. It is a huge concession for DARPA to even allow the use of code developed by a Canadian based company."
Did you think that through before posting? Code under BSD/Open Source can be modified, deleted, and reused wherever, however. Therefore, does it make a difference where it comes from? If it was bad code to begin with, why did they trust OpenBSD to support it in the first place?
Theo has his right to speak against the war in Iraq, and your military has their rights to cancel their funding, even if it seems like an infantile retaliation. However, if Theo had advance warnings, so his team wouldn't lose their money on cancelling their discount plane tickets, there wouldn't be much of a problem.
There isn't a problem now that the conference is still on.
What OS will DARPA use now??? -
It just proves...
2003-04-23 04:14:49 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
"if you do not play by the rules"? What rules are you talking about? The rules forbidding free speech to get into the USA, even in the case where the speech was made outside the US?
-
It just proves...
2003-04-22 08:22:46 Ian F. Darwin [Reply | View]
>It is a huge concession for DARPA to even allow the use of code developed by a Canadian based company.
Oh, you can be sure DOD will go on using OpenBSD, because it's better than what's out there.
The people making those decisions don't have to be guided by petty politics. And, since OpenBSD is truly free software, they don't have to be guided by petty budget cuts either. Even though they snubbed the project, they can (and will) continue using the project's free software. Try cancelling a multi-million-dollar deal with a big American software company and then continuing to use their product without paying for it.
P.S. OpenBSD is not "a Canadian based company" (sic); it is an international collection of people
developing good, free, secure computer software.
-
Concession?
2003-04-21 23:13:32 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Ohhh yeah... we'd all be sleeping better at night if our nuclear arsenal were being run on a WindowsXP network, huh?
"Colonel, Why are we at DefCon 2?"
"I'm sorry, General, someone answered some e-mail using Outlook, and the whole system went down... we're supposed to be getting a patch,though...."
Gee, why don't more people take OSS seriously when we have such skilled ambassadors to represent the OSS community as a reliable and accountable alternative to that offered by closed-source vendors with decades-long track records of meeting the government's needs?
All Theo did was squander a nice opportunity for OSS by spouting his bubblegum brand of bimbo geopolitics when he should have either said "Thank you" or "No thank you, but I'd rather not participate". A savvy movement would recognize this for what it was: An inept "leader" who damaged the cause he wanted to promote so that he could impress his friends with the extensive depth of geopolitical knowledge that pours into Calgary like a NSA datacenter. Good job.