The principles of IT backup have been around since the sixties. In 1975/6 i was involved with Federal government in setting up the backup for then UHCS later re-badged as Medicare. There are two cases, data and software. In the ASX case it appears that the software and or process used for backup was itself faulty. Anyone involved with the major consulting firms knows the first question of a lead consultant is " what are you looking for?" ASX got that with a few "notes" as @aes411 wrote: " The IBM report says it was not reasonable to conclude the platform was ready for go-live, based on some findings, among which were:
additional testing needs noted
the quantity of open defects
gaps in end-to-end test coverage
" You have to wonder how the main thrust of the IBM report - as covered by AFR, could make ASX look to have proceeded reasonably given the caveats just mentioned.. AFR have gone after ASIC as looking weak, while downplaying the obvious defects in the software testing at the time of the changeover. It looks obvious that AFR are fully on board with ASX in matters not just related to ISX.
How this plays into ISX' pending cases appears to me to be very limited. For example, are the disclosure standards ASX applies to itself the same as ASIC thinks ISX should have met regarding the revenue in the ASIC v ISX case? Apart from that case the courts are unlikely to follow dot joining beyond matters at hand. IMO. DYOR.
ISX Price at posting:
$1.07 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
