FairPort Accused of Faking Network Readiness Test 144
wytcld writes "When Verizon spun off its Northern New England lines to FairPoint, FairPoint leased Verizon's computer network to manage them. This was costly, so FairPoint readied its own network. To prove its own network was ready for the switchover a demonstration was prepared for an outside auditor, Liberty. Now a whistleblower claims: '...when Liberty was watching what they thought was "flow thru" within a system and from one system to another, they were really only seeing a small program that was created to assimilate what they wanted the systems to do. They were not actually in the systems at the time nor were they in the test systems. They were in a newly created small program that used screen shots from the real system to deceive the audience into believing that they were watching a real demonstration.' How easy is it to find auditors who can be fooled by such a simple trick? Whether or not the test was faked, the network has proved so unready that FairPoint is close to bankruptcy, and may have its licenses to operate revoked in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont."
Very Easy (Score:5, Informative)
How easy is it to find auditors who can be fooled by such a simple trick?
Very easy. While auditors tend to do a good job of detecting whether a report is realistic, their main objective is to get you to sign off saying, "This is what we do." Then, if you do not do that, you are personally liable.
They aren't detectives (though they often do some of that as well), they are guarantors of accountability. Your-ass-uncoverers for the CYA generation, if you will.
FairPort or FairPoint? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Help! (Score:2, Informative)
"they were really only seeing a small program that was created to assimilate what they wanted the systems to do."
I think they meant "to SIMULATE what they wanted the systems to do"...
Isn't compulsory education wonderful?
Re:"assimilate" or "simulate"? (Score:5, Informative)
assimilate: To consume and incorporate (nutrients) into the body after digestion.
simulate: ... 2. To make a pretense of; feign: simulate interest.
kdawson: illiterate who pretends to be an editor.
Re:"assimilate" or "simulate"? (Score:1, Informative)
Actually, assimilate may also be used in the sense of "to make similar" or "to cause to resemble"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assimilate
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assimilate
Nothing too sea hear. Move along.
Re:Help! || Sovernet (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Help! (Score:5, Informative)
To put it in perspective, Fairpoint brings us such blunders as 911 outages [wmtw.com] and Horrible Customer Service [mainetoday.com] which has prompted Investigations [boston.com] by local governments.
In short Fairpoint is horrendous!
Re:"assimilate" or "simulate"? (Score:2, Informative)
to be fair it was a direct quote. there are plenty of things to complain about on slashdot, this is not one of them.
Re:Auditors have no clue (Score:5, Informative)
I think you're misunderstanding the whole point of Sarbanes-Oxley.
A SOX auditor doesn't investigate the systems in detail. They are documentors, and usually are hired by the people who are being audited. This isn't like an IRS audit where it's a confrontational thing, it's more of a "discover and document", and it's supposed to be a partnership between the auditor and the company being audited.
The auditing company doesn't know your practices, but they have a list of acceptable (or "best" if you prefer) practices. They come in and ask you how you do things, and if your practices are not acceptable, they are supposed to give you a list of them so you can work on them for the next round of auditing.
Lying to a SOX auditor serves no useful purpose, because the auditor is not there to penalize you for bad practices, they are there to help you avoid them. At the end, they gather information about how the company works from company employees WHO THEN SIGN THEIR NAMES to the audit, along with a list of gaps the company has promised to work on for the next audit.
If/when the company practices are found to deviate from what the company officers claimed, those officers can then be held personally liable for those inconsistencies. So if you lie to a SOX auditor, you can lose your house if your name is on the report and someone can prove that you lied later on.
EXAMPLE:
You hire a SOX auditor who looks into your company's practices on passwords. The auditor asks "Do you require complex passwords that must be changed at least quarterly?" And you don't. You can answer:
YES: At which point the auditor checks off the little ticky box and you sign your name to that document. Auditor leaves happy.
NO: At which point the auditor tells you that you need them, and the two of you set a date for a re-evaluation of that point, and you sign your name to that document.
A month later, your company is hacked due to a weak or fixed password.
If you answered "YES", then it will be quickly discovered that you lied in your SOX audit, and you will be held personally and possibly criminally liable for your answer. In other words, your house and fancy car go away, and you and Bubba get to know each other really well. And Bubba loves corporate criminals because they don't fight as much.
If you answered "NO", then it will be quickly discovered that you documented this weakness and were working toward fixing it. Depending on the amount of press, you might still get scapegoated and thrown out on the street, but you have a document on file saying you told the truth about the problem, so unless you go in for a conjugal visit you and Bubba will never meet.