Hi Ben,
There is a danger in editing out the subtleties, and then discovering it
says what we want :) That "..." is significant!
On 27/1/09 11:45, Ben Bucksch wrote:
On 14.01.2009 18:49, Ian G wrote:
In _Rampell_ [2]:
"... Those audits are relied on not only by the clients on whose
financial matters audits are performed but upon a host of other
individuals and entities who may rely on the information in making
their own economic decisions. Audited statements are relied upon by
banks, other creditors, and investors ... In short, the use of
financial statements attested by "licensees" is so frequently used in
our economic system as to be indispensable..."
The same could be said about IT security review - including source code
review, processes and server operations. Even the exact same words, if
you replace "financial"/"economic" with "security" and "banks, other
creditors, and investors" with "all the customers".
Going back to my quote, and adding my emphasis:
==================
1. From my notes: I found no law or case law that nails this down, but
there is dictum ("non-binding opinion") that is careful to draw a line
between financial audits and any other role. In _Rampell_ [2]:
"...*While others may provide* tax services or bookkeeping services,
"*licensees of the board of accountancy*" alone perform the 'attest'
function, which refers to the process by which "licensees" audit
*financial statements* and express opinions as to those financial
statements. Those audits are relied on not only by the clients on whose
financial matters audits are performed but upon a host of other
individuals and entities who may rely on the information in making their
own economic decisions. Audited statements are relied upon by banks,
other creditors, and investors ... In short, the use of financial
statements attested by "licensees" is so frequently used in our economic
system as to be indispensable..."
==================
Read that first sentence very carefully. The judge is saying, no. Not
only is this area reserved for accountants, they cannot use their
special "audit powers" outside the strict role [1], and the public
cannot rely on the "attest function" outside the strict financial audit.
The reason he is saying the latter is that if the special power were
broadened, the function of the audit *over financial statements* would
be weakened, and that is too indispensable to our economic system to be
permitted [2].
In other news, a new US Treasury secretary has been sworn in. He
probably gets the job of managing the largest financial handout in
history, to the the most bankrupt industry with the richest employees,
and the most auditors.
I wonder if the Senate had the thought of asking him how the attest
function and the broadening role of accountancy firms in consulting
effected the financial crisis [3]?
iang,
auditor, but not lawyer, nor accountant, nor licensed to the attest
function in any relevant state!
[1] remembering this is unreliable on several counts
* I don't know law,
* a new court might think of things differently,
* the above is not a precedent, just an opinion called "dictum"
* a state law sometimes does think differently
* indeed this guys says some of that directly
http://www.allbusiness.com/accounting/methods-standards/368326-1.html
* I think I quoted from him, and he may have snipped important parts!
* there are other countries involved
* i'm an auditor so I am biased
* i'm not an accountant, so I am biased......
[2] Even unreliable, it does tell us what we might want to do. In order
for the public to rely on a qualified and licensed *accountant*
performing the *attest function* in a systems audit of computers with no
financial component in sight, we would have to get the judge to agree to
things like:
a) *accountancy* is a good basis for judging computers, crypto,
law, contracts, software design, the Internet, etc.
b) the board of accountancy is a good test of people who can do the
above,
c) the board of accountancy wants this massive expansion,
d) the accountants want this massive expansion,
e) the use of the accountants in this area does not weaken the
power of the attest function in any way over financial statements.
f) or, the weakening of finance is ok because we strengthen the
security field?
and perhaps some more.
[3] Of the above, a,b,c,f reasonable people might discuss without
reaching agreement. d. is a slam-dunk, the whole history of the
accounting field in the last 20-30 years screams "YES!". e. is also an
easy choice, the whole history of the financial crisis screams something
too :)
--
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
