3 ms·

This doesn't work, because the complexity and reach of the systems are themselves sensitive information about capabilities. Even the un-classified stuff is min

This doesn't work, because the complexity and reach of the systems are themselves sensitive information about capabilities. Even the un-classified stuff is mind-blowing, including thinking about how to even begin running/building a system like that. Software code would reveal way too much of that, even after being sterilized.

Jtsummers 5y ago
It does work. It's called software engineering, you separate concerns between subsystems so you can assemble them separately and with alternative implementations of the other subsystems. Like if you have a classified (for whatever reason) subsystem you can provide an alternative implementation that at least lets you build the system, possibly doing what amounts to a no-op or some bare-minimum version (perhaps slower and stupider using public algorithms if the classified algorithms are classified for some key mathematical or physical insight). Regarding running/building, sure, it's harder. But mostly because of expense, the specific examples were military and US DOD and its contractors buy compilers. So buy a license for Green Hills or similar and you can build it. Buy an ARM development board and you can run it. "ARM?!?!?" Yes, ARM. Embedded systems in the modern era (that is to say, after 2000 but starting sometime in the 1980s) use off-the-shelf chips, perhaps hardened versions for things like satellites. "Hardened" doesn't necessarily change the architecture, mostly just ties them to an old version of it. If the software is from pre-1990 there's a good chance it is running on a bespoke architecture, but after that point, and certainly after 2000, it became rarer. Now, whether they will release the code is another matter. Doing this determination requires good upfront engineering or a lot of analysis before releasing it. But good engineering has been known to happen from time to time, even by the government. More practically, though, the software will mostly be developed by contractors who will retain the copyright and so it won't be public domain.
- beerandt 5y ago
  If software is released for a sub-system that enemies don't know exists, or for a senior system that makes calls to that sub-system, damaging information is being revealed right there. Even just exposing data structures will reveal capabilities by virtue of the data created by them. If an fighter pilot's battlefield/ situational awareness software makes calls to 4 known methods of battlefield communication, and also to an additional unknown one, then that reveals info, even without knowing anything else about it. Maybe you're intending that all of these types of inquiries, or data sharing capabilities be redacted or sanitized somehow, but that seems like a huge undertaking in itself, especially if you expect a working product. And then what would that resulting skeleton product's remaining value be, for the extra effort put into releasing it? Besides potentially helping other countries close the capability gap.

Jtsummers 5y ago

It does work. It's called software engineering, you separate concerns between subsystems so you can assemble them separately and with alternative implementations of the other subsystems. Like if you have a classified (for whatever reason) subsystem you can provide an alternative implementation that at least lets you build the system, possibly doing what amounts to a no-op or some bare-minimum version (perhaps slower and stupider using public algorithms if the classified algorithms are classified for some key mathematical or physical insight). Regarding running/building, sure, it's harder. But mostly because of expense, the specific examples were military and US DOD and its contractors buy compilers. So buy a license for Green Hills or similar and you can build it. Buy an ARM development board and you can run it. "ARM?!?!?" Yes, ARM. Embedded systems in the modern era (that is to say, after 2000 but starting sometime in the 1980s) use off-the-shelf chips, perhaps hardened versions for things like satellites. "Hardened" doesn't necessarily change the architecture, mostly just ties them to an old version of it. If the software is from pre-1990 there's a good chance it is running on a bespoke architecture, but after that point, and certainly after 2000, it became rarer. Now, whether they will release the code is another matter. Doing this determination requires good upfront engineering or a lot of analysis before releasing it. But good engineering has been known to happen from time to time, even by the government. More practically, though, the software will mostly be developed by contractors who will retain the copyright and so it won't be public domain.

beerandt 5y ago
If software is released for a sub-system that enemies don't know exists, or for a senior system that makes calls to that sub-system, damaging information is being revealed right there. Even just exposing data structures will reveal capabilities by virtue of the data created by them. If an fighter pilot's battlefield/ situational awareness software makes calls to 4 known methods of battlefield communication, and also to an additional unknown one, then that reveals info, even without knowing anything else about it. Maybe you're intending that all of these types of inquiries, or data sharing capabilities be redacted or sanitized somehow, but that seems like a huge undertaking in itself, especially if you expect a working product. And then what would that resulting skeleton product's remaining value be, for the extra effort put into releasing it? Besides potentially helping other countries close the capability gap.