[trustable-software] Additional requirement for trustability

[Will Barnard]

On 24/08/18 08:57, Paul Sherwood wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think the original call-to-action has served quite well [1] in 
> helping us to establish that for trustability we need to consider:
>
> - Functionality (we know what it does);
> - Security* (we know what it does, it does what it's supposed to do, 
> we can update it with confidence, we know where it comes from);
> - Reliability (it does what it is supposed to do);
> - Provenance (we know where it comes from);
> - Reproducibility (we know how to build it and can reproduce it);
> - Safety (does not cause harm);
>
> On reflection I'm thinking that there is a significant area missing, 
> though:
>
> - Legality (complies with applicable standards/laws);
These may be related but I am not sure that these are the same thing. 
The software may or may not be compliant with a particular standard. 
Compliance with a standard may or may not be a legal requirement 
depending upon the jurisdiction.

In any case, we can consider compliance with a standard as a set of 
requirements, I am not sure we gain much by treating standards or legal 
requirements in a different way to other requirements.

>
> Assuming no-one disagrees, I'm going to update to the homepage to 
> reflect this, and add legality/compliance into the logical model we've 
> been developing.
>
> While I'm on, are there any other suggestions to improve the 
> homepage/mission statement?
>
> br
> Paul
>
> [1] https://trustable.gitlab.io
>
> _______________________________________________
> trustable-software mailing list
> trustable-software at lists.trustable.io
> https://lists.trustable.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/trustable-software