Breathalizer Source Code Ruling Upheld
from the another-good-decision dept
A few years back, in a high profile series of lawsuits, a lawyer representing some folks accused of drunk driving asked the manufacturer of a breathalyzer testing machine for access to the product's source code, so experts could review it to make sure it functioned properly. The company refused, citing trade secrets. However, a judge noted that this went against the defendants' rights to a fair trial, and said that the breathalyzer evidence had to be thrown out. Slashdot points us to the news that an appeals court has upheld the ruling noting that due process outweighs the company's trade secrets. While I have no problem with prosecuting drunk drivers, I do agree that the evidence should be solid -- and not allowing the source code to be examined is a problem.This is, in many ways, similar to the issue with e-voting machines. Considering the gov't is making important decisions based on these machines, it seems only reasonable that the source code should be at least reviewable to investigate the quality of the machines. Though, it strikes me as odd that we're even more stringent with Breathalyzers than with e-voting machines. Where's the similar ruling about e-voting machines and the availability of their source code?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: breathalyzer, openness, source code
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That, or I'm just really, really cynical today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I mean, granted career politicians are not the sort of people you want running things. That's why you get situations like Bush not getting impeached despite the 35 articles of impeachment read before congress: Pelosi said it was not "on the table" and when you look into why, its because if they went through with it and Bush DID get impeached so would Cheney and a few others and she'd be the President until the election.
It was politically inconvenient for her so they just didn't bother with it.
At the same time there are politicians occasionally that are good for the people. Kennedy quite possibly could of been one, though I wonder if him being one of the "best Presidents ever" is because he was assassinated. I wasn't alive at the time so I can't really say how he was on a day to day basis, though he seemed to handle the Cuba thing and the space race pretty damn well.
Then there are the politicians that think they are doing what is best for the country, like Nixon. That guy screwed up big, but amazingly he didn't realize how badly until it all came crashing down.
I'd say that more people are at risk to the actions of the President and other politicians than drunk driving. Sure, I see more drunks on the road than I'd like, but the last few administrations are partly why we're in the current financial issues.
I don't know about you, but a lot of people I know have had to go to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've lost more people to those countries than to any drunk driver. I don't want a pacifist President, but I don't want a trigger happy one either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
but what ppl forget to mention or perhaps choose not too.
if the source code are open to the public then there weaknesses can be identified much faster and that code can be updated.
were as in the "closed code system" the weaknesses will remain and the few ppl who do manage to find them (and ppl will eventually find them) can exploit them as they need.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Poorly written source code
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sheila
I think that just gives us better representation if more hackers can do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh Please!!
YY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh Please!!
You said it yourself, Offering up the code did not change the end result of the case. So what is wrong with submitting the source code if it wont change anything other than adding a few, "I told you so"s. Unless you are worried that something would found which told the true story, and not your story.
Can you say, "Rights to a fair trial, not biased upon bias"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh Please!!
Good job on screwing with the system. Kudos to you, asshat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh Please!!
Good thing for you the defendant & his lawyers weren't tech-savvy enough to catch that. It seems to me that submitting source code TO THE COURT, AS EVIDENCE, for a machine other than the one in question, while telling the court that it IS the correct source code, would count as perjury.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trials, Elections, or Gambling?
Since you brought up voting, I'd like to comment that it has always surprised me that the Nevada Gaming Control Board takes electronic gambling more seriously than we seem to take electronic voting. They include serious technical security and performance specifications, source code deposit or escrow (can't remember), audit, investigations, etc. They uncover real crime, at the machine code level, that cheats people out of money.
What does it say about us that we think fairness in gambling deserves more oversight than fairness in elections?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
--- What ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Re: DoxAvg
That's exactly my argument against e-voting machines. There's no way of knowing what's inside them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If given access to the source code, will the next lawsuit demand an unimpeachable chain from the source code to the device? Who's to say that the source code delivered to the defendants isn't from the "CYA" tree of the version control system, not the "special branch" that's actually delivered to dirty cops?
While it may sound a little paranoid, it's not unheard of for companies to sometimes bend the rules a little bit in order to cover up past mistakes.
Even if you can secure that chain, in Ken Thompson's Reflections On Trusting Trust he outlines an argument wherein even if you have an demonstrated chain from source code to device, you still need to secure every device and piece of software involved from start to finish, and their entire histories. There's a good summary of it at Good Math, Bad Math. It's probably below the noise floor for a courtroom, but it pokes holes in the argument that "only by having access to the source can we be absolutely sure". No, even with access to the source you can't be absolutely sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When pulled over for DUI/DWI, dont the cops use simple portable breathalyzers as a preliminary BAC screening. At the time that their device reads a number close enough to suspect you as being legally intoxicated, they will bring to their station for an "official" BAC reading through their more advanced Breathalyzer machine... aka, "The Drunk Verification Box" (or through blood-test if you decline that.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where's the lawsuit?
Where's the lawsuit to make it happen? Having groups like the EFF sue does not always help. It is much more effective when an actual victim brings the lawsuit. With the breathalizers, it is easy to find a specific victim. With voting machines, it is more difficult.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Step in the right direction
Hmmmm.. our country does have some history to fall back on that kind of thing, ITS CALLED A WITCH HUNT!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
due process and trade secrets
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not the first
To yaddayadda @ 3:49 am -- your snarky comment is asinine. First, no competent attorney would attempt to review source code him/herself. They would retain an expert, and any really decent attorney would find someone with genuine expertise in the technology at issue. And second, you are very lucky nobody figured out what you did. Had you been caught, you would have been at risk of very severe sanctions by the court . . . up to and including hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs and fines, and even jail for contempt of court, which is a criminal offense. You may laugh, but I've seen it happen more than once to wiseass techies who think they can pull a fast one over lawyer snd the court, only to get caught and have to fork over a huge chunk of their earnings for a decade or more to compensate my client for attorney fees and expenses, the court for violating governing rules, and the penal system for the cost of incarceration while serving their sentence for the contempt violation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Off topic, but after reading four posts, I had to put this in.
There are too many people (note NOT ppl) who need to learn to spell. Jeez.
If you can't spell, you will not be as understood. If you can't make yourselves (note NOT yourselfs) understood, you can't expect you elected representatives to do what you want them to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Off topic, but after reading four posts, I had to put this in.
Classic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If I were the judge I would allow the defense to test the device to their hearts' content, and if the prosecution balked I'd throw out the breathalyzer evidence. [bangs gavel]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While giving the source would be inappropriate...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: While giving the source would be inappropriate...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: While giving the source would be inappropriate...
The cheat code maybe ? Something like:
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
asas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]