|
The Hopkins Team response |
|
August 1, 2003
Throughout [Diebold's] document, they refer to details of our paper as "allegations," and they attempt to argue away these allegations with logic that is often contrived. We have no personal ill-will toward Diebold as a company; our aim was to provide a technical analysis of the code that we had at our disposal. While our conclusions have upset those who stand to lose financially from these conclusions and those who are embarrassed by decisions they have made without the knowledge of the insecurity in the code, we firmly stand behind our findings. ...
Read more |
