|
|
|
|
|
|
by csa
1338 days ago
|
|
|
In the US, especially with federal money, this would be ample justification for a congressional inquiry and a potential fraud, waste, and abuse claim. The usual outcome of the investigation is uncovering a bunch of people just saying that they were doing what they were told to do, and no one taking the common sense approach of looking at the current vendor. It might push one or two incompetent middle managers into retirement. That said, it may get fixed for the next round of bids. It may have long term change depending on which congresspeople were involved. |
|
|
The only result of this would be millions more dollars "investigating" version 1, led by the bureaucrats who made the decision to build a v.2, including paying an army of consultants to find every possible flaw and non-compliant feature, in order to justify their decisions. The horns will really come out then... v.1 did not achieve 100% accessibility according to OSHA, cookies had the potential to leak data, the JS packages underneath were not vetted and compliant, no guard against denial-of-service, the list of possibilities is endless... point being, when you force gov't officials to find a flaw in something because their job is being questioned, they essentially have unlimited resources to find that flaw and justify their own existence.