Feeds

Microsoft to build 'transparency centres' for source code checks

Governments invited to Brussels for a look up Redmond's skirts

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

Microsoft has announced it will establish a set of "transparency centres" around the world, at which government clients can rifle through its source code to satisfy themselves it contains no back doors.

Announced last week at the Munich Security Conference, Microsoft's veep for security Matt Thomlinson said the centres “...will offer government customers an increased ability to review our source code” and advance “our long-standing program that provides government customers with the ability to review our source code, reassure themselves of its integrity and confirm there are no back doors.”

Just how many transparency centres will be created, or where they will be, is not disclosed. Redmond doesn't seem to be in a hurry to build them: Thomlinson's announcement says “It is my hope to open the Brussels Transparency Center by the end of this year.”

One by the end of the year? Take that, NSA and other oppressors of liberty.

Whatever the scale of the effort, the announcement continues a pattern of Microsoft activities pointing out that its software doesn't leak so much as a bit in the direction of anyone you wouldn't want to see that bit.

Just what level of access to source code is not, however, explained. Last December, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith wrote that the company believes in giving government customers “an appropriate ability to review our source code, reassure themselves of its integrity, and confirm there are no back doors.” Is that appropriate to customers? Or appropriate to Microsoft inasmuch it will allow comfort without compromising code declared commercial-in-confidence but which could conceal something interesting?

Yes, that observation is a tad cynical. But also, surely, is announcing a network of “Transparency centres” by revealing the existence of just one and giving that facility a far-from-taxing aspirational opening date eleven months from now. And what's with the name, “Transparency centres”? Orwell himself didn't do much better with the Ministry of Truth.

Thomlinson also floated another idea at the conference, namely a “'G20 + 20' group – 20 governments and 20 global information and communications technology firms – to draft a set of principles for acceptable behavior in cyberspace.” That body, he said, could help to rebuild trust in technology that has been so badly disturbed by recent revelations. ®

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Of COURSE Stephen Elop's to blame for Nokia woes, says author
'Google did have some unique propositions for Nokia'
FCC, Google cast eye over millimetre wireless
The smaller the wave, the bigger 5G's chances of success
It's even GRIMMER up North after MEGA SKY BROADBAND OUTAGE
By 'eck! Eccles cake production thrown into jeopardy
Mobile coverage on trains really is pants
You thought it was just *insert your provider here*, but now we have numbers
Don't mess with Texas ('cos it's getting Google Fiber and you're not)
A bit late, but company says 1Gbps Austin network almost ready to compete with AT&T
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.