| 1 | == Summary Table: Guix vs. Commercial OS Platforms in Air-Gapped Environments |
| 2 | |
| 3 | || Feature / Concern || Guix System || RHEL / Windows (Commercial Vendors) || |
| 4 | || Reproducible builds || Full functional package manager with bit-for-bit reproducibility || Rare, not the default; often impossible to verify || |
| 5 | || Declarative system configuration || Entire OS and services declared in one file (config.scm) || Partial via kickstart (RHEL) or Group Policy (Windows) || |
| 6 | || Source-based verification || Build everything from source with pinned hashes || Can build some packages from source (e.g. SRPMs), but not guaranteed or easy || |
| 7 | || Transparent dependency graph || guix graph, complete dependency visibility || Opaque; relies on vendor tooling or trust || |
| 8 | || Custom internal repositories || Simple to set up private channels or mirrors || Possible but complex (e.g., Satellite, WSUS, SCCM) || |
| 9 | || Air-gap support (by design) || Built-in tools for exporting and importing sources (guix archive) || Requires extra software and policies || |
| 10 | || System rollback and audit trail || Native support for generations and rollbacks || Possible with snapshots or backups; not reproducible || |
| 11 | || Security patching control || You control exactly when and how updates are applied; reproducible || Updates are controlled by vendor timelines or manual QA workflows || |
| 12 | || Proprietary trust requirement || No vendor black-box binaries required || Trust required in vendor-signed binaries || |
| 13 | || Compliance alignment (e.g., CIS, STIG) || Manual setup, but full control || Vendor-provided baselines, common in regulated environments || |
| 14 | || Support & certification || Community or niche consulting || Enterprise support, certifications (Common Criteria, etc.) || |
| 15 | |
| 16 | == Security & Supply Chain Control |
| 17 | |
| 18 | Guix System: |
| 19 | You can inspect, audit, and rebuild every component of your system — from the kernel to applications — using cryptographically pinned source inputs. |
| 20 | The entire dependency graph is traceable and reproducible, even across machines and time. |
| 21 | Perfectly suited for classified or national security work, where vendor trust cannot be assumed. |
| 22 | RHEL / Windows: |
| 23 | You receive pre-built binaries signed by the vendor. |
| 24 | You often trust opaque CI/CD systems outside your control. |
| 25 | Reproducing or auditing software at a fine-grained level is non-trivial or impossible. |
| 26 | |
| 27 | == Tooling and Maintenance |
| 28 | |
| 29 | Guix: |
| 30 | You define everything declaratively — no surprises at runtime. |
| 31 | You can script, version-control, and diff system changes like source code. |
| 32 | Integration with CI/CD is powerful but requires Scheme fluency and a Unix mindset. |
| 33 | RHEL / Windows: |
| 34 | You use vendor tools (e.g., Satellite, WSUS, SCCM) to manage updates and installations. |
| 35 | Configuration drift is common without complex tools like Ansible, Puppet, or GPO. |
| 36 | More user-friendly, but less introspectable. |
| 37 | |
| 38 | == Air-Gap Suitability |
| 39 | |
| 40 | Guix: |
| 41 | Designed for air-gapped reproducibility. |
| 42 | You can export all sources via guix archive or guix pack. |
| 43 | Build servers can remain offline and secure. |
| 44 | |
| 45 | Commercial Systems: |
| 46 | Air-gap support is not native. |
| 47 | Requires additional tooling for mirroring updates, verifying patches, and avoiding telemetry. |
| 48 | Licensing and activation can be problematic offline. |
| 49 | |
| 50 | == Risk Mitigation in Classified Contexts |
| 51 | |
| 52 | Risk Guix Mitigation RHEL/Windows Mitigation |
| 53 | Supply chain tampering Build everything from trusted source Trust vendor signatures and processes |
| 54 | Configuration drift Fully declarative system + rollbacks Ansible, Puppet, GPO |
| 55 | Covert binaries / blobs Avoided by default (FOSS only) Often required for hardware drivers, tools |
| 56 | Forced updates / phones-home None unless added by user Needs group policy / firewall control |
| 57 | |
| 58 | == When to Use What? |
| 59 | |
| 60 | Choose Guix if: |
| 61 | * You need maximum transparency and reproducibility. |
| 62 | * You operate in a high-assurance, national security, or research environment. |
| 63 | * You can tolerate a steeper learning curve and limited vendor support. |
| 64 | |
| 65 | Choose RHEL / Windows if: |
| 66 | |
| 67 | * You need certified support, pre-approved baselines, or are bound by specific compliance standards (e.g. NIST, CIS). |
| 68 | * Your staff is trained in those ecosystems and you prioritize vendor backing over code transparency. |
| 69 | * You're in regulated industry and want '''checkbox compliance''' with minimal friction. |
| 70 | |
| 71 | == Final Thoughts |
| 72 | |
| 73 | Guix System offers unparalleled control, auditability, and air-gap suitability, but requires organizational commitment and technical maturity. |
| 74 | Commercial platforms offer smoother compliance workflows and official support, but at the cost of transparency and independence. |