News Archive (1999-2012) | 2013-current at LinuxGizmos | Current Tech News Portal |    About   

LynuxWorks blasts GHS ‘FUD’

Apr 13, 2004 — by LinuxDevices Staff — from the LinuxDevices Archive — 2 views

RTOS and embedded Linux vendor LynuxWorks has responded to last week's statement from Green Hills Software that lambasted embedded Linux as inappropriate for use in high security defense and military applications. The LynuxWorks response refutes GHS claims that open systems such as Linux are inherently ineligible for EAL-7 certification.

LynuxWorks was among the companies criticized in the GHS statement for working with foreign developers in China, Russia, and elsewhere.

According to LynuxWorks, open standards and standards-based OSes such as Linux are enjoying growing popularity in government, to the detriment of systems such as those from GHS that are not based on open standards. LynuxWorks Vice President Bob Morris said, “Non open standards-based software is continuing to be overlooked in favor of Linux and POSIX, which is why you are seeing vendors employ scare tactics meant to fuel the FUD [fear, uncertainty, and doubt] regarding the security of open standards-based software.”

Importance of open standards

The LynuxWorks statements explains that open standards such as POSIX are gaining momentum in government applications because they facilitate application portability, software reuse, and system interoperability. The POSIX standard was designed to ensure source code portability between operating systems. POSIX “conformance” means software has been approved by an accredited, independent standards authority as certified to all levels of the POSIX standard.

Despite widespread government support for open standards testing, few agencies actually require it, according to LynuxWorks, other than the Allied Standard Avionics Architecture Council (ASAAC) and the Navy Open Architecture Computing Environment (OACE).

Because open standards support is encouraged, but rarely required, some vendors label their software as POSIX “compliant,” a meaningless claim that simply lists which levels of POSIX are and are not supported, according to LynuxWorks.

LynuxWorks claims that all its products, including its Linux-based operating systems, are POSIX conformant. Such conformance, it says, will enable them to work with a “separation kernel” LynuxWorks is designing to meet EAL-7 certification.

EAL-7

EAL-7 represents the highest level of the Common Critera, a system of ranking system security. Certification to EAL-7 dictates that a software product has been formally verified, designed, and tested. Today, no commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) operating system is certified to EAL-7, although it remains theoretically and mathematically achievable.

The earlier GHS statement alluded to an operating system GHS is developing that is “designed” to meet EAL-7 criteria (but hasn't yet), while implying that open source software is inherently ineligible for such certification.

LynuxWorks says it is currently developing a Common Criteria level EAL-7 secure separation kernel in concert with the NSA (National Security Agency) and others. The kernel aims to eliminate the timely and costly system evaluation process the government and military are currently performing on each operating system it deploys.

LynuxWorks says its separation kernel will enable any POSIX conformant operating system, including Linux, Solaris, HP-RT, HPUX, and UNIX, to run in a secure partition on an EAL-7 system.

Dr. Singh's zingers

“The old paradigm of 'security through obscurity' is out the window,” said Dr. Inder Singh, CEO of LynuxWorks. “Perception is that you can not trust software that you did not create yourself. Reality is that with the advent of an EAL-7 separation kernel, you can. We're on the cusp of reaching a monumental milestone never before achieved in the embedded software industry.”

Dr. Singh added, “Sweeping generalizations that Linux poses a national security threat are shortsighted and self-serving. Implying that the government is not assuring the highest levels of security for software that they deploy is baseless and inaccurate. All major military systems undergo extensive review and vulnerability analysis. This is quite contrary to the current commercial industry practice of 'penetrate and patch' for security, as evidenced by recent virus attacks against Windows-based systems.”

Furthermore, according to Dr. Singh, “The government and military [employ] prevention and 'defense in depth' to ensure the highest level of security. In other words, exploitable flaws are eliminated at each stage of the system design process. A significant amount of time and money is devoted to make sure this occurs at each step of the software development lifecycle.”

“Open standards architectures will be vital to decrease the time and costs in ensuring security in the military design process,” concludes Dr. Singh.



 
This article was originally published on LinuxDevices.com and has been donated to the open source community by QuinStreet Inc. Please visit LinuxToday.com for up-to-date news and articles about Linux and open source.



Comments are closed.