[CAVO] Fwd: DHS remarks re: OS ??

Brent Turner turnerbrentm at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 16:15:23 UTC 2016


Good work CAVO and allies-
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: DHS remarks re: OS ??
To: Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>


Amazing -- check out the reversal!

https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/issues/222

Excerpt:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) strongly supports the proposed
Federal Source Code Policy. We believe moving towards Government-wide reuse
of custom-developed code and releasing Federally-funded custom code as open
source software has significant financial, technical, and cybersecurity
benefits and will better enable DHS to meet our mission of securing the
nation from the many threats we face.


--Chris



On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Done on both -cobbled together
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Brent, I don't see your reply in the comments:
>>
>> https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/issues/152
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I posted a reply  --  Best it comes from me so as to keep you legits
>> > insulated from shrapnel
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I don't know if David will as he works with DHS et al and may not want
>> to
>> >> out himself--
>> >>
>> >> I will do it if no one else will
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Chris Jerdonek <
>> chris.jerdonek at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Brent, someone should correct DHS's comments on the record on the
>> GitHub
>> >>> issue. Can David do it?
>> >>>
>> >>> In particular, the stuff about FOUO.
>> >>>
>> >>> Btw, it's ironic that DHS provided their comments in the form of an
>> Excel
>> >>> spreadsheet, which is itself a proprietary format that requires
>> Microsoft
>> >>> software to read natively.
>> >>>
>> >>> --Chris
>> >>>
>> >>> On Friday, April 15, 2016, Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>>> From: David RR Webber (XML) <david at drrw.info>
>> >>>> Date: Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 6:03 PM
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [CAVO] DHS remarks re: OS ??
>> >>>> To: CAVO <cavo at opensource.org>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Brent - no this is just silliness / paranoia.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sensitive software is listed as FOUO - For Official Use Only - and
>> that
>> >>>> information is restricted internal only.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There are review procedures in place. They are not going to publish
>> >>>> anything that would be an at risk disclosure.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I see this is just drum beating to ensure that there is no rolling
>> back
>> >>>> in these areas.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Having said that - I have seen deliberate abuse of this - where
>> parties
>> >>>> label non-sensitive items - to prevent access / criticism of the
>> content
>> >>>> involved - and/or to continue funding of pet projects that are
>> clearly
>> >>>> worthless - or have public open solutions already in place - but
>> we're
>> >>>> paying to make a poor substitute government one.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Worse - duplicate efforts in different government areas are
>> essentially
>> >>>> building the same thing.  The GAO should be all over this - but
>> again - lack
>> >>>> of transparency and correct labelling of purpose - prevents
>> correlation -
>> >>>> and cross-pollenization.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ironically there is probably a need for such government open source
>> and
>> >>>> internal sharing more than public!!!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> David
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -------- Original Message --------
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [CAVO] DHS remarks re: OS ??
>> >>>> From: Brent Turner <turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
>> >>>> Date: Thu, April 14, 2016 11:37 pm
>> >>>> To: CAVO <CAVO at opensource.org>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Could it be that these remarks are not actually from the DHS.. ??
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Or could it be that a vendor interested party has managed to provide
>> >>>> misinformation to someone " up the ladder " ?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thoughts ??
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Brent Turner <
>> turnerbrentm at gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://fcw.com/articles/2016/04/12/open-source-cyber.aspx?m=1
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ________________________________
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> CAVO mailing list
>> >>>> CAVO at opensource.org
>> >>>> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cavo
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> CAVO mailing list
>> >>>> CAVO at opensource.org
>> >>>> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cavo
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20160418/f667efcd/attachment.html>


More information about the CAVO mailing list