Once again, we have dictates and rules based security policy and no solutions provided.
If the EU is so concerned about cyber security they should:
1) provide A LOT of funding and support for Linux / BSD and other operating systems and flavors for testing, hardening, and rapid patch rollout
2) provide infrastructure to support such activities
3) use open source software actively in government with a focus on providing feedback and patches from government IT back to the mainline projects
A founding tenet of security is that open systems and techniques are the ones that will be most battle tested and therefore resilient.
Alas open source has terrible lobbying, so the closed source vendors can lobby politicians and policy to go the opposite way: prescribe closed source solutions and additional onus on open source.
If first world economies were serious about cyberdefense and hardening, there would be 10 billion dollars annually invested into the foundations of open source software: Linux/BSD, databases, webservers, browsers, programming languages, etc. The militaries alone should be dedicating this level of funding to defend our infrastructure, economies, and whatever technological edge we have over China.
And the EU in particular should like Linux: it originated there, and has strong roots throughout the EU, and most importantly isn't controlled by a major US corporation (unlike Apple/Microsoft) and therefore indirectly controlled by the US government.
The EU is a bureaucracy and any bureaucracy's goal is to justify its existence by creating more bureaucracy. I'm personally anti-EU. European countries are way too different so that broad legislations can work with 27+ different countries.
All 50 states have the same language, the same general culture, have fought the same wars, vote for the same 2 political parties, watch the same media, and more or less have the same economy.
But really, just the language thing is enough to make the comparison silly.
I mean thats the whole point of federalism and is why we have a Senate which represents states equally (no matter their size) at the same time the House represents people.
If something isn't popular enough to pass muster for the majority of people and the majority of states, it should stay a state law instead of a federal one.
If the EU is so concerned about cyber security they should:
1) provide A LOT of funding and support for Linux / BSD and other operating systems and flavors for testing, hardening, and rapid patch rollout
2) provide infrastructure to support such activities
3) use open source software actively in government with a focus on providing feedback and patches from government IT back to the mainline projects
A founding tenet of security is that open systems and techniques are the ones that will be most battle tested and therefore resilient.
Alas open source has terrible lobbying, so the closed source vendors can lobby politicians and policy to go the opposite way: prescribe closed source solutions and additional onus on open source.
If first world economies were serious about cyberdefense and hardening, there would be 10 billion dollars annually invested into the foundations of open source software: Linux/BSD, databases, webservers, browsers, programming languages, etc. The militaries alone should be dedicating this level of funding to defend our infrastructure, economies, and whatever technological edge we have over China.
And the EU in particular should like Linux: it originated there, and has strong roots throughout the EU, and most importantly isn't controlled by a major US corporation (unlike Apple/Microsoft) and therefore indirectly controlled by the US government.