you can't sell your company as being safe for elections if you're not vetting all of it?
right? i don't know. i just do the social sciences.
here's an idea though, you probably agree, paper ballots (or reporting, whatever they do at a caucus). turn them in at the station like we always do here.
I think it really depends on how they bucketed out the work.
When we test for security we usually have very specific scopes for out work and there's a very extensive paper trail of the work done, expectations and results.
Considering DHS is said to have been a part of the work in creating this App I have to believe there were plenty of people checking to ensure the integrity of the data.
But that really on tells part of the story. I'm not sure if they were responsible for conducting the tests themselves, coordinating with other subcontractors to perform the test, or if they were brought in as a group to verify the results of the test that were performed or if they were housed to do it top to bottom.
There were clearly large misses in implementation, the testing of various scenarios, reporting, load management(?), account configuration and required training before being given the keys.
That said, I think it worthwhile to modernize elections if it increases accessibility. But as it stands it looks like we're some ways away from there.
But yes, paper ballots are a must have until then and I'm not sure what value they gained by doing it this way instead of their previous systems.
I'm guessing we'll find out it was to help someone get paid.
