Open Source Weblog

The 79-page report proposes that the DoD adopt what it calls "open technology development," which incorporates open source methodologies and open standards, but also takes into account the fact that the DoD has systems that it would rather keep secret.

"It is important, in the context of this report and resulting policy discussions, to distinguish between OSS and OTD, since the latter may include code whose distribution may be limited to DoD, and indeed may only be accessible on classified networks," states the report, before maintaining that OTD does also not "impinge on the legal states" of commercially-developed software.

What it does do is recommend the use of open source software, open standards, and open source development methodologies within the DoD. According to the report, this is in the national interest, as it holds the potential to reduce software purchasing and development costs.

"Currently within DoD, there is no internal distribution policy or mechanism for DoD developed and paid for software code. By not enabling internal distribution, DoD creates an arbitrary scarcity of its own software code, which increases the development and maintenance costs of information technology across the Department," it states.

"Other negative consequences include lock-in to obsolete proprietary technologies, the inability to extend existing capabilities in months vs. years, and snarls of interoperability that stem from the opacity and stove-piping of information systems."

But it is also in the interests of national security. "The national security implications of open technology development (OTD) are clear: increased technological agility for warfighters, more robust and competitive options for program managers, and higher levels of accountability in the defense industrial base," it states.

"DoD needs to use open technology design and development methodologies to increase the speed at which military systems are delivered to the warfighter, and accelerate the development of new, adaptive capabilities that leverage DoD’s massive investments in software infrastructure."

The reports suggests that in order to make the most efficient use of internal resources the DoD move to adopt open technology development, with an initial focus on AS&C projects to develop the policies, procedures, requirements and best practices for OTD.

The report indicates how forward thinking the DoD is in terms of software usage models, and how far the debate has come since 2004, when anti-open source FUD suggested open source might be a danger to national security.

SCO Group CEO Darl McBride (who else) wrote to US senators and representatives in January that year claiming that open source software threatened the US economy, technological innovation, and even national security.

“I assert that open source software – available widely through the Internet – has the potential to provide our nation’s enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by US law," he wrote.

Dan O’Dowd, CEO of embedded systems vendor Green Hills Software, took up the baton in April 2004, claiming that embedded Linux is unsuitable for use in US defense systems because it is open to contributions from the open source community at large.

"Now that foreign intelligence agencies and terrorists know that Linux is going to control our most advanced defense systems, they can use fake identities to contribute subversive software that will soon be incorporated into our most advanced defense systems," he said.

"Every day new code is added to Linux in Russia, China and elsewhere throughout the world. Every day that code is incorporated into our command, control, communications and weapons systems. This must stop."