What's new

Turkish Industry, Science and Technology

Aselsan's mobile digital X-Ray device was displayed for the first time.

Aselsan Mobil Dijital X-Ray Röntgen Cihazı.jpg


Aselsan's defibrillator device was displayed for the first time.
Aselsan Heartline.jpg


Biovent ventilator device of Biosys company with the contribution of Aselsan. Currently in mass production.
Biosys-Aselsan Biyovent Ventilatör Solunum Cihazı.jpg
 
Balamir said:
Pardus continues. projects in the IT sector will also benefit Turkey as it is in the defense sector. Cloud solutions like social media search engine Google drive are not only civilian services but also information gathering and soft power. For example, Yandex and Google photograph all streets and streets on map services. Even military areas in Turkey despite the TSK's response drew Yandex.

Also 10 years ago Yandex was terrible now better Yaani project is not only Turkcell project, make sure.

Turkish IT poducts

*CAKIL: Microprocessor based on RISC-V architecture (Firstly, it is planned to be used in RCWS in the defense sector, then new processors will be developed for mobile devices.. ASELSAN-TÜBİTAK BİLGEM

*PARDUS: Debian based open source operating system Pardus.. Its usage in public institutions is increasing.. TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM

*YAANI: Platform to offer services such as search engine, translation, photo and file storage, navigation, mail, voice assistant together.. TURKCELL

*BIP: Instant messaging application. It introduced features like voice calls, video conferencing with multiple people before Whatsapp. Used in Ukraine and some European countries.. TURKCELL

*Graphene based screen for mobile devices used in defense and civil sector developed in partnership with Aselsan and Sabancı SUNUM

*CHOMAR: Anti-virus software..

*WHO: Audio and video supported dating application.. Scorp

*SCORP: Application of commenting under a topic title with 15 seconds videos

*anonymous social media project.. TURKCELL

*FIZY: Online music streaming application.. TURKCELL
Click to expand...
You seem to know your stuff, that is why I hope you can answer these questions. What is going on with the Pardus project? In the previous post it basicly said that the project failed due to some decision like pisi and debian (no idea what these are btw) based. But you are saying it continues, to which I can safely assume that it hasn't failed? What is the plan with Pardus? Are they planning to replace Windows and other OS's with Pardus in all official state institutions or something?
 
Inspector Spacetime said:
You seem to know your stuff, that is why I hope you can answer these questions. What is going on with the Pardus project? In the previous post it basicly said that the project failed due to some decision like pisi and debian (no idea what these are btw) based. But you are saying it continues, to which I can safely assume that it hasn't failed? What is the plan with Pardus? Are they planning to replace Windows and other OS's with Pardus in all official state institutions or something?
Click to expand...
Pardus was rendered ineffective when FETÖ was active, and the project was stopped. It was decided to continue after FETÖ cleaning. However, it is now a Debian based operating system. It was previously an original distribution on its own. The use of Pardus in institutions like municipalities is increasing. They may switch all institutions to this system in the future. Due to the prevalence of Windows, its inability to patch against external attacks in a timely manner makes it unsafe. However, Pardus is open source because it uses Linux kernel. This is the security weakness of Linux. There is a fact that there is no 100% safe operating system in the world.
 
Balamir said:
Pardus was rendered ineffective when FETÖ was active, and the project was stopped. It was decided to continue after FETÖ cleaning. However, it is now a Debian based operating system. It was previously an original distribution on its own. The use of Pardus in institutions like municipalities is increasing. They may switch all institutions to this system in the future. Due to the prevalence of Windows, its inability to patch against external attacks in a timely manner makes it unsafe. However, Pardus is open source because it uses Linux kernel. This is the security weakness of Linux. There is a fact that there is no 100% safe operating system in the world.
Click to expand...
The earlier pardus was based on gentoo, it wasnt an entirely built distro but more orginal than a debian with some make up. But gentoo was more flexible than a 'readily packaged' debian.
In my opinion debian (and its offsprings) is widely used, and it could be easier to develop apps or port apps developed for debian based distros (specially like ubuntu , it is most common desktop distro which many companies develop apps for them like spotify, and now there are something called sandboxing and containerizing and things became more fun).
Besides that, debian is 'free' same as 'gentoo' it is a preference to built a distro on whichever suits best for the purpose. It isnt like debian has something which is not free or it is worse than gentoo.
What is bad, besides all, the efforts made for earlier pardus could have been made for the newer version and we could have a better distro which can be widely used in public services, at ministiries, army, universities and so on. Sadly, despite of earlier pardus made up with dire efforts of ambitious individuals, and people have spent their time to build something good, some sneaky people has realized they can rip off more money just by putting some make up on debian. And this has ended pardus figuratively, and turned it into a debian with some make up with quite a few efforts being put into. It isnt about being gentoo or debian but whole mindset has changed regarding to the project.
Personally, i still wouldnt use it because i havent got used to be on debian or gentoo based systems. I use CentOS on servers and desktop, fedora at my laptop.
 
Last edited:
ANMDT said:
The earlier pardus was based on gentoo, it wasnt an entirely built distro but more orginal than a debian with some make up. But gentoo was more flexible than a 'readily packaged' debian.
In my opinion debian (and its offsprings) is widely used, and it could be easier to develop apps or port apps developed for debian based distros (specially like ubuntu , it is most common desktop distro which many companies develop apps for them like spotify, and now there are something called sandboxing and containerizing and things became more fun).
Besides that, debian is 'free' same as 'gentoo' it is a preference to built a distro on whichever suits best for the purpose. It isnt like debian has something which is not free or it is worse than gentoo.
What is bad, besides all, the efforts made for earlier pardus could have been made for the newer version and we could have a better distro which can be widely used in public services, at ministiries, army, universities and so on. Sadly, despite of earlier pardus made up with dire efforts of ambitious individuals, and people have spent their time to build something good, some sneaky people has realized they can rip off more money just by putting some make up on debian. And this has ended pardus figuratively, and turned it into a debian with some make up with quite a few efforts being put into. It isnt about being gentoo or debian but whole mindset has changed regarding to the project.
Personally, i still wouldnt use it because i havent got used to be on debian or gentoo based systems. I use CentOS on servers and desktop, fedora at my laptop.
Click to expand...

To really be capable of hardening your military industry and defense equipment against the danger of cyber attacks or cyber surveillane, a whole ecosystem of products has to be created.

1. At the top you need to develop the control software for your armament and the applications used for design and development by the industry (e.g. Simulation Tools, CAD tools, etc). If you use foreign tools, these are very likely to contain hidden code that provides an interested actor highly confidential data about your products.

2. Underneath this, you need domestically developed operating systems. Windows and Linux won't cut it here because you cannot trust them. You will need to develop a bunch of home-grown OSes suitable for real-time and security-critical applications, or adopt something already already developed in this space. These products are built with security as the primary design goal.

Although for commercial use it is okay to develop a Linux distro or they could switch to something like ReactOS which is an open source Windows clone! It can even run existing Windows applications, and the project is by the looks of it quite desperate for funding and manpower. Not as much of a mess as linux is but either way neither Linux nor Windows/ReactOS are really suitable for defense products because you don't have control over the whole codebase.

3. Next you will need domestically developed compilers and libraries whose code you control and can audit and patch with full authority. You cannot really trust the code if you can't trust the compiler or the libraries you use.

4. Underneath this you will need to develop the hardware like CPUs, FPGAs, DSPs, RAM, flash storage and basically all the components that can contain hardware backdoors. Domestic processors are especially critical here because of how much they can affect the performance of your products, and also because a backdoor in them can negate every other security measure you have taken elsewhere.

5. Finally, you will need to develop your own semiconductor manufacturing equipment. If the fabrication equipment comes from overseas, you can never trust the circuitry it prints. This is also a highly profitable and niche industry.

Of course, all this requires such a broad effort that it will be impossible to develop the entire ecosystem at a single organization or in a centralized manner. The entire private sector IT/Electronics industry will have to be mobilized and incentivized for this and most of the work will be done by universities and small private sector enterprises. But you cannot ignore any single one of these areas, because if you don't have a domestic solution available, you are still vulnerable to an embargo and you won't be able to defend against your enemies in the cyberspace.
 
ANMDT said:
The earlier pardus was based on gentoo, it wasnt an entirely built distro but more orginal than a debian with some make up. But gentoo was more flexible than a 'readily packaged' debian.
In my opinion debian (and its offsprings) is widely used, and it could be easier to develop apps or port apps developed for debian based distros (specially like ubuntu , it is most common desktop distro which many companies develop apps for them like spotify, and now there are something called sandboxing and containerizing and things became more fun).
Besides that, debian is 'free' same as 'gentoo' it is a preference to built a distro on whichever suits best for the purpose. It isnt like debian has something which is not free or it is worse than gentoo.
What is bad, besides all, the efforts made for earlier pardus could have been made for the newer version and we could have a better distro which can be widely used in public services, at ministiries, army, universities and so on. Sadly, despite of earlier pardus made up with dire efforts of ambitious individuals, and people have spent their time to build something good, some sneaky people has realized they can rip off more money just by putting some make up on debian. And this has ended pardus figuratively, and turned it into a debian with some make up with quite a few efforts being put into. It isnt about being gentoo or debian but whole mindset has changed regarding to the project.
Personally, i still wouldnt use it because i havent got used to be on debian or gentoo based systems. I use CentOS on servers and desktop, fedora at my laptop.
Click to expand...
Gentoo is a source code distribution. An ordinary user cannot use such a distribution. Because it is difficult to use the command line. Pardus is a fork of this system. It would not be correct to say that it is completely Gentoo based. However, the new Pardus is based on Debian and not entirely independent, but on the other hand it is based on Debian means it is integrated into a larger ecosystem. In addition, when Pardus was stopped, the group leaving this project started PisiLinux. In its current form, PisiLinux is more free and independent than Pardus. One of the most important differences is that it uses its own package system called Pisi.

Meanwhile, Pardus brought the website together with a new design and it was very nice.
 
Last edited:
wulff said:
To really be capable of hardening your military industry and defense equipment against the danger of cyber attacks or cyber surveillane, a whole ecosystem of products has to be created.

1. At the top you need to develop the control software for your armament and the applications used for design and development by the industry (e.g. Simulation Tools, CAD tools, etc). If you use foreign tools, these are very likely to contain hidden code that provides an interested actor highly confidential data about your products.

2. Underneath this, you need domestically developed operating systems. Windows and Linux won't cut it here because you cannot trust them. You will need to develop a bunch of home-grown OSes suitable for real-time and security-critical applications, or adopt something already already developed in this space. These products are built with security as the primary design goal.

Although for commercial use it is okay to develop a Linux distro or they could switch to something like ReactOS which is an open source Windows clone! It can even run existing Windows applications, and the project is by the looks of it quite desperate for funding and manpower. Not as much of a mess as linux is but either way neither Linux nor Windows/ReactOS are really suitable for defense products because you don't have control over the whole codebase.

3. Next you will need domestically developed compilers and libraries whose code you control and can audit and patch with full authority. You cannot really trust the code if you can't trust the compiler or the libraries you use.

4. Underneath this you will need to develop the hardware like CPUs, FPGAs, DSPs, RAM, flash storage and basically all the components that can contain hardware backdoors. Domestic processors are especially critical here because of how much they can affect the performance of your products, and also because a backdoor in them can negate every other security measure you have taken elsewhere.

5. Finally, you will need to develop your own semiconductor manufacturing equipment. If the fabrication equipment comes from overseas, you can never trust the circuitry it prints. This is also a highly profitable and niche industry.

Of course, all this requires such a broad effort that it will be impossible to develop the entire ecosystem at a single organization or in a centralized manner. The entire private sector IT/Electronics industry will have to be mobilized and incentivized for this and most of the work will be done by universities and small private sector enterprises. But you cannot ignore any single one of these areas, because if you don't have a domestic solution available, you are still vulnerable to an embargo and you won't be able to defend against your enemies in the cyberspace.
Click to expand...
+1
 
wulff said:
To really be capable of hardening your military industry and defense equipment against the danger of cyber attacks or cyber surveillane, a whole ecosystem of products has to be created.

1. At the top you need to develop the control software for your armament and the applications used for design and development by the industry (e.g. Simulation Tools, CAD tools, etc). If you use foreign tools, these are very likely to contain hidden code that provides an interested actor highly confidential data about your products.

2. Underneath this, you need domestically developed operating systems. Windows and Linux won't cut it here because you cannot trust them. You will need to develop a bunch of home-grown OSes suitable for real-time and security-critical applications, or adopt something already already developed in this space. These products are built with security as the primary design goal.

Although for commercial use it is okay to develop a Linux distro or they could switch to something like ReactOS which is an open source Windows clone! It can even run existing Windows applications, and the project is by the looks of it quite desperate for funding and manpower. Not as much of a mess as linux is but either way neither Linux nor Windows/ReactOS are really suitable for defense products because you don't have control over the whole codebase.

3. Next you will need domestically developed compilers and libraries whose code you control and can audit and patch with full authority. You cannot really trust the code if you can't trust the compiler or the libraries you use.

4. Underneath this you will need to develop the hardware like CPUs, FPGAs, DSPs, RAM, flash storage and basically all the components that can contain hardware backdoors. Domestic processors are especially critical here because of how much they can affect the performance of your products, and also because a backdoor in them can negate every other security measure you have taken elsewhere.

5. Finally, you will need to develop your own semiconductor manufacturing equipment. If the fabrication equipment comes from overseas, you can never trust the circuitry it prints. This is also a highly profitable and niche industry.

Of course, all this requires such a broad effort that it will be impossible to develop the entire ecosystem at a single organization or in a centralized manner. The entire private sector IT/Electronics industry will have to be mobilized and incentivized for this and most of the work will be done by universities and small private sector enterprises. But you cannot ignore any single one of these areas, because if you don't have a domestic solution available, you are still vulnerable to an embargo and you won't be able to defend against your enemies in the cyberspace.
Click to expand...
impossible
 
It may be possible to use it in public sector, but not ever in the private sector.

Even in Denmark they are using ancient dos based systems in public sectors. So they often have to run two OS.
 

Similar threads

R
Pakistani Students Team Among Three Winners of International Competition by Top European Research Labs
Replies
2
Views
656
RiazHaq
R
Hakikat ve Hikmet
Why the Turkish Military Industrial Complex Needs Pakistan
Replies
11
Views
1K
Path-Finder
Path-Finder
_NOBODY_
Inside CERN’s ‘antimatter factory’ creating antihydrogen - BBC News
Replies
0
Views
465
_NOBODY_
_NOBODY_
Foinikas
Erdogan is back
2 3 4 5
Replies
63
Views
4K
SaadH
S
dBSPL
Turkiye and China nearing a nuclear power plant deal
Replies
4
Views
858
LegionnairE
LegionnairE

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom