|
|
|
|
|
by shadowgovt
772 days ago
|
|
Different issue. In that case, the vendor had given some guarantees of consistency of data across network nodes that the network didn't actually support. Because there were guarantees, the law went looking for horses instead of zebras, and the "horses" in this case were that only a few people had admin rights to mess with the transactions and the audit logs. ... but in reality, no human was messing with those; system bugs were dropping or duplicating data. The government should not have trusted claims of a third-party without independent auditing they controlled (and, ultimately, I think that's the takeaway that all governments should be taking from this disaster). |
|