autotldr@lemmings.world
on 25 Apr 2024 16:55
nextcollapse
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former Post Office executive Angela van den Bogerd has said executives did not “cover up” knowledge that the computers of sub-postmasters could be accessed remotely.Despite “a slew” of emails referring to the possibility of remote access to the Horizon IT system used in branches, Ms van den Bogerd had not challenged Post Office statements denying a back door, a lawyer said at an inquiry into the scandal.But she said she had not been attempting to suppress information.Earlier she told the inquiry that she “didn’t knowingly do anything wrong”.The Post Office asserted in hundreds of wrongful prosecutions of sub-postmasters that they must have been to blame for shortfalls in accounts, which were calculated using the Horizon IT system.The prosecutions, between 1999 and 2015, saw people go to prison, while many others were left financially ruined and lost their jobs, businesses and homes.
Some died while waiting for justice.In certain key cases, such as the landmark Bates vs Post Office, the organisation insisted that the Horizon software could not be accessed remotely by any other party.As part of that case, Ms van den Bogerd told the High Court in March 2019 that she first knew about remote access “in the last year or so”.But Jason Beer, lead counsel to the inquiry, said on Thursday: "That’s false isn’t it?
"Ms van den Bogerd was heavily depicted in the ITV drama which thrust the Post Office scandal back into the spotlight, played by Coronation Street actress Katherine Kelly.Ms van den Bogerd said in her witness statement to the inquiry that she was not aware of remote access to accounts until 2011.The inquiry was shown a series of emails that Ms van den Bogerd received from 2010 to 2014 about remote access to Horizon.A December 5 2010 email sent to her by Lynn Hobbs, the organisation’s general manager of network support, said she had “found out that Fujitsu can actually put an entry into a branch account remotely”.But Ms van den Bogerd told the inquiry she didn’t “actually remember” getting this.She also got emails in 2011 and 2014 telling her about the possibility of remote access.But in 2014 Post Office communications professional Melanie Corfield sent an email to several Post Office executives, including Ms van den Bogerd.It read: “Our current line, if we’re asked about remote access being used to change branch data or transactions, is simply ‘this is not and has never been possible’.
Or is it that the overriding objective is to defend, very robustly, the position that there is no remote access?”
he said.Ms van den Bogerd said “that was never my position” and that "I was certainly not trying to cover up or suppress, or do anything along those lines, and that’s the bit I’m struggling with, because it wasn’t just me - there are other people being party to the same information at that point.
"Ms van den Bogerd confirmed to Mr Beer that Fujitsu had not been “transparent” with her and the Post Office, and also agreed that executives had been trying to control the narrative by using the words “exception or anomaly” to describe bugs or defects in the Horizon system.Ms van den Bogerd held various roles throughout her 35-year career at the Post Office, rising to head of network services, head of partnerships, director of support services and director of people and change.
The original article contains 671 words, the summary contains 556 words. Saved 17%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
tutus@sh.itjust.works
on 25 Apr 2024 17:48
nextcollapse
People at the Post Office and Fujitsu need to go to jail over this.
It won’t happen. They’ll get away with it. Same as ever.
cflewis@programming.dev
on 26 Apr 2024 17:39
collapse
People literally committed suicide over the hounding by the Post Office. People have gone to jail for encouraging suicide. People go to jail for false statements to the police and the court.
Executives get golden parachutes and incompetent contractors keep getting contracts.
jordanlund@lemmy.world
on 25 Apr 2024 19:16
nextcollapse
Probably important to note that this is the UK Post Office and not, say, the United States Postal Service.
VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world
on 25 Apr 2024 21:26
collapse
I’m sure some postmasters went postal over being convicted of no crime.
QuantumSpecter@lemmy.world
on 25 Apr 2024 23:08
nextcollapse
The question I’ve had, why did Fujitsu place a backdoor in the horizon system?
palordrolap@kbin.social
on 26 Apr 2024 15:25
collapse
Probably because some n-eyes (is n still 5?) nation state "we're the good guys, honest" protocol insisted that there be one. And if it wasn't that it was probably some misguided attempt to permit remote maintenance.
The former hiding as the latter is not impossible either.
cflewis@programming.dev
on 26 Apr 2024 17:41
collapse
My guess is it’s much simpler: some genius at Fujitsu thought it would be helpful if they could remotely log in to machines for support reasons. They (unreasonably) didn’t want to send people onsite and they (reasonably) didn’t think Post Office workers would be able to resolve issues over the phone.
ikidd@lemmy.world
on 26 Apr 2024 03:08
nextcollapse
I’ll just bet she does. Someone or several someones deserve to be in prison for a long time.
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
on 25 Apr 2024 17:07
nextcollapse
This person should hang. Full stop.
She knowingly caused the deaths of others. That’s a capital crime in my book.
threaded - newest
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former Post Office executive Angela van den Bogerd has said executives did not “cover up” knowledge that the computers of sub-postmasters could be accessed remotely.Despite “a slew” of emails referring to the possibility of remote access to the Horizon IT system used in branches, Ms van den Bogerd had not challenged Post Office statements denying a back door, a lawyer said at an inquiry into the scandal.But she said she had not been attempting to suppress information.Earlier she told the inquiry that she “didn’t knowingly do anything wrong”.The Post Office asserted in hundreds of wrongful prosecutions of sub-postmasters that they must have been to blame for shortfalls in accounts, which were calculated using the Horizon IT system.The prosecutions, between 1999 and 2015, saw people go to prison, while many others were left financially ruined and lost their jobs, businesses and homes.
Some died while waiting for justice.In certain key cases, such as the landmark Bates vs Post Office, the organisation insisted that the Horizon software could not be accessed remotely by any other party.As part of that case, Ms van den Bogerd told the High Court in March 2019 that she first knew about remote access “in the last year or so”.But Jason Beer, lead counsel to the inquiry, said on Thursday: "That’s false isn’t it?
"Ms van den Bogerd was heavily depicted in the ITV drama which thrust the Post Office scandal back into the spotlight, played by Coronation Street actress Katherine Kelly.Ms van den Bogerd said in her witness statement to the inquiry that she was not aware of remote access to accounts until 2011.The inquiry was shown a series of emails that Ms van den Bogerd received from 2010 to 2014 about remote access to Horizon.A December 5 2010 email sent to her by Lynn Hobbs, the organisation’s general manager of network support, said she had “found out that Fujitsu can actually put an entry into a branch account remotely”.But Ms van den Bogerd told the inquiry she didn’t “actually remember” getting this.She also got emails in 2011 and 2014 telling her about the possibility of remote access.But in 2014 Post Office communications professional Melanie Corfield sent an email to several Post Office executives, including Ms van den Bogerd.It read: “Our current line, if we’re asked about remote access being used to change branch data or transactions, is simply ‘this is not and has never been possible’.
Or is it that the overriding objective is to defend, very robustly, the position that there is no remote access?”
he said.Ms van den Bogerd said “that was never my position” and that "I was certainly not trying to cover up or suppress, or do anything along those lines, and that’s the bit I’m struggling with, because it wasn’t just me - there are other people being party to the same information at that point.
"Ms van den Bogerd confirmed to Mr Beer that Fujitsu had not been “transparent” with her and the Post Office, and also agreed that executives had been trying to control the narrative by using the words “exception or anomaly” to describe bugs or defects in the Horizon system.Ms van den Bogerd held various roles throughout her 35-year career at the Post Office, rising to head of network services, head of partnerships, director of support services and director of people and change.
The original article contains 671 words, the summary contains 556 words. Saved 17%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
People at the Post Office and Fujitsu need to go to jail over this.
It won’t happen. They’ll get away with it. Same as ever.
People literally committed suicide over the hounding by the Post Office. People have gone to jail for encouraging suicide. People go to jail for false statements to the police and the court.
Executives get golden parachutes and incompetent contractors keep getting contracts.
Probably important to note that this is the UK Post Office and not, say, the United States Postal Service.
I’m sure some postmasters went postal over being convicted of no crime.
Suicidal unfortunately in many cases.
Here’s the Wikipedia article for anyone catching up like me.
The question I’ve had, why did Fujitsu place a backdoor in the horizon system?
Probably because some n-eyes (is n still 5?) nation state "we're the good guys, honest" protocol insisted that there be one. And if it wasn't that it was probably some misguided attempt to permit remote maintenance.
The former hiding as the latter is not impossible either.
My guess is it’s much simpler: some genius at Fujitsu thought it would be helpful if they could remotely log in to machines for support reasons. They (unreasonably) didn’t want to send people onsite and they (reasonably) didn’t think Post Office workers would be able to resolve issues over the phone.
I’ll just bet she does. Someone or several someones deserve to be in prison for a long time.
This person should hang. Full stop.
She knowingly caused the deaths of others. That’s a capital crime in my book.
The real warning here is prosecutors being able to say “the system cannot be accessed remotely”.
That assertion should not be allowed to stand without a 3rd party audit of the complete system and supporting technology.