Any forensic activity in an "election audit" better use proper computer forensic tools -- if you want the results to have any validity. Tell us when is CyterNinjas going to use forensic tools recommended by accrediting organizations such as American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)? Or follow the Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS)?
Bull shit. You are making a ton of assumptions. There is absolutely nothing wrong with them utilizing R.
Tell us when is CyterNinjas going to use forensic tools recommended by accrediting organizations such as American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)? Or follow the Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS)?
I don't really trust any program whatsoever that is not open source in which I can't see the code. If I were doing the audit, I would write my own programs as well. Any programmer would agree with me. Trust an algo in which you can't even see the code? I don't give a shit who endorsed the program. Hey, I got some black box trading algos that work great. I will PM you the sales price.
Nobody knowledgeable trusts "computer audit tools" which allow the "auditors" to change the data without tracking or attribution.
You do understand that many computer forensic programs are open source. Or do you fail to even understand this. Can you tell use where CyberNinjas documented process for using computer forensic tools is located? This is a required document before you start touching the computers in any type of proper computer forensic evaluation. BTW -- CyberNinjas already admitted they have no documented computer forensics process or plan.
All the other election audits in the U.S. performed by accredited professional firms provide a documented computer forensics process document outlining their plans & tool chain prior the start of performing any computer forensics as part of an audit. Where is the documented plan -- which should be publicly available -- from CyberNinjas?