stevedcc writes: "Anandtech are running an article about a Minnesota man who is asking for the breathlyzer source code as part of his defence against a drunk driving charge. From the article:
"One of the common criticisms (which is also made of voting machines) of breath devices is that the "state-certified" models are updated even after they are certified. The companies that manufacture the machines make tweaks, bug fixes, and even add new features, but the machines are not generally recertified after every single source code change. This means that any given machine could potentially be running non-certified code, code which may or may not have errors.....As a bonus, if a company proves unwilling to turn over the code, the case often gets thrown out without any need to prove that the source code is in fact flawed.