Re: [SystemSafety] The VW Saga

From: Matthew Squair < >
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:22:10 +1100


'm sure it could be done. But maybe testing more realistically so that the test can't be spoofed might be easier? As I understand it that's how the VW issue was found in the US?

Matthew Squair

MIEAust, CPEng
Mob: +61 488770655
Email; Mattsquair_at_xxxxxx
Web: http://criticaluncertainties.com

On 12 Oct 2015, at 8:15 PM, Peter Bernard Ladkin < ladkin_at_xxxxxx

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA256

On 2015-10-12 10:48 , RICQUE Bertrand (SAGEM DEFENSE SECURITE) wrote:

It depends.

It sure does!

(I'm slowly beginning to think this is your way of saying "Hi everyone!" :-) )

It raises interesting questions. Can the retrofit be mandatory ? How can the usual periodic

tests (very generic) discover a problem designed to be hidden ?

The questions are indeed interesting, and complicated. I raised this issue a while ago (in 2014, I
think) privately. Both colleagues thought one could never get companies to agree to open up their
SW IP (as Naughton points out, an increasing portion of the value of a product) to third-party
inspection. But one of them thinks it an appropriate measure, as I do.

It can't be impossible. For a long time, companies have had to open their finances to independent
inspection once a year. For financial companies (some of the very biggest companies), almost their
entire IP consists in that. It also doesn't always work (Enron, WorldCom, Lehmann, Madoff). But it
mostly does.

So it can be done. What's different about the case for SW?

It would have to be done through legal instrument, as with finances. And if just one country
passes such a law, then there is the danger that multinationals will just stop selling their
products there.

But I bet there's a way somehow.

PBL Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany
Je suis Charlie
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319 www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWG3omAAoJEIZIHiXiz9k+7TkH/jHrosRlDEP8ZXPabMl/a376 uxSPWeghLO+2Vrtf3Q1PxkWt5Ry57IM05A665P+hDEm4raQWuSXwG7HPNMlDyZH4 j+nVSO+sFYN45ZUM38gev0msv2FYKSym9DrVASv/GXFDJ8mDUKYlAo/ClWipCamC pxpUzC+D/W4eMd+as1BeIwUco1NaNZjbiDtOKq48FfVajkz0iszXdBo0Hx/L5srh SJF7466TNgmHxrwI/rFkCcTm1fCqdCwI9iVdVshmj5gvpWhCzNOnz0mTvArqRibp vD1TeLXrDaY/Ewjph8LM4xkg2ud1zw2RFq4vTCs3dP6ch2UteYQYgLn4IZj62oI= =DMHm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx <systemsafety_at_xxxxxx


The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Mon Oct 12 2015 - 11:22:22 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:07 CEST