More Barr: How stack overflow corrupts memory and can cause task death

Stack overflow is not this pretty

Studies show only 1% of SA is caused by driver error

Excerpt from Castelli et al, The Myth of Driver Error, (PDF) page 13

If we pretend to accept Toyota's claims of 30% of SA caused by mat and sticky pedal, and then follow this 1% caused by driver error (i.e. pedal misapplication), we have 69% left that remains unexplained.

So what is the cause?

Joel, can you explain away this 69%?

Technical hide and seek: Recursion is....?

 Joke: "To understand recursion, you must understand recursion."

Barr said on the stand in Bookout:

"There are some recursive functions in Toyota source code that are not appropriate in safety critical systems."

"Not only was stack usage up to 94% in normal operation, the code was recursive! Recursive code is generally avoided in embedded applications because it is harder to demonstrate that it has a good chance of working reliably. MISRA - the Motor Industry Software Reliability Association - has a rule that explicitly forbids recursion. Toyota claimed it followed MISRA standards but more than 80,000 violations were found."

Barr: Toyota had no test plan to test throttle opening calculations by software

Throttle opening mathematics, yes...test plan...no

Some of it is looking a bit obscure.

BARR UNDER OATH SAYS on the stand in Bookout:

IP Addresses hide and seek

Turkey - a beautiful country

Since I made a wisecrack several weeks ago about a spike in blog visitors from Japan, there have been almost no blog visitors from Japan. 

Instead I see a remarkable spike in blog visitors from Turkey.

What could that mean?

I don't really care that much about where people are from. If you want to be from Japan, Turkey, Moldova, Ukraine, or any other place, please, go ahead and hide yourself and pretend to be from somewhere else. If you think you are being clever in hiding who you are or where you are, does that make you feel better, more secure?

This blog is for everyone who wants to see it, no matter where they are.

[Update a few days later]
Well, I'll be darned. Just as soon as I posted this, my many visitors from Turkey disappeared! 

Sunday school. Bilaam and his donkey in Numbers 22

Bilaam and his Donkey

Numbers 22:21-35

Bilaam’s Donkey

[Bilaam was a prophet who fell into the role of sabotaging the Israelites after he could not curse them]

21 Bilaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with the Moabite officials. 22 But God was very angry when he went, and the angel of the Lord stood in the road to oppose him. Bilaam was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword in his hand, it turned off the road into a field. Bilaam beat it to get it back on the road.

24 Then the angel of the Lord stood in a narrow path through the vineyards, with walls on both sides. 25 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord, it pressed close to the wall, crushing Bilaam’s foot against it. So he beat the donkey again.

26 Then the angel of the Lord moved on ahead and stood in a narrow place where there was no room to turn, either to the right or to the left. 27 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord, it lay down under Bilaam, and he was angry and beat it with his staff. 28 Then the Lord opened the donkey’s mouth, and it said to Bilaam, “What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?”

29 Bilaam answered the donkey, “You have made a fool of me! If only I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now.”

30 The donkey said to Bilaam, “Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?”

“No,” he said.

31 Then the Lord opened Bilaam’s eyes, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with his sword drawn. So he bowed low and fell facedown.

32 The angel of the Lord asked him, “Why have you beaten your donkey these three times? I have come here to oppose you because your path is a reckless one before me.[a] 33 The donkey saw me and turned away from me these three times. If it had not turned away, I would certainly have killed you by now, but I would have spared it.”

34 Bilaam said to the angel of the Lord, “I have sinned. I did not realize you were standing in the road to oppose me. Now if you are displeased, I will go back.”

35 The angel of the Lord said to Bilaam, “Go with the men, but speak only what I tell you.” So Bilaam went with Balak’s officials.

*************************************************

Oh dear Akio-kun, along with your best lawyers Chris, Tom, Joel, and all of you, maybe you could consider a different picture...just imagine for a minute--in some dream world-- that you suddenly woke up to the reality that I am trying to help you avoid the angel of God's wrath (the one from New York) who may soon try to smite you for your recklessness. So far, you have twice taken a legal stick to my head. Maybe...I can imagine it, I can dream of it like a far-off dream... you will beat my head with the stick three times and then you will finally hear me, and then your eyes will open, you will see the angel, and you will repent of your recklessness. Hopefully this will be accomplished before you ask a judge to throw me in jail, and hopefully before New York's wrathful one won't ask to throw you in jail.



With thanks to Rembrandt van Rijn for a beautiful painting,
and to the smart and kind donkey for his good words.

Here's a fun card for Joel

My, my, Joel seems so bothered by anyone who does not immediately bend to his personal authority

I will nickname you "Klink," ok? You are simply ridiculous in light of the indisputable fact that you are working for admitted criminals. 

I allege that they appear determined to continue to conceal aspects of their misconduct that have not yet been uncovered by the DOJ.  And I think that you know all about that.

Waiting for the bull

A waiting matador

The legal situation has advanced past the pie-throwing stage to the horns-tossing stage.

Let's see what will happen next.

Not IF someone was going to be hurt or killed, but WHO.

An SUA waiting room

      - From Bookout, closing argument by Cole Portis, who is on Skadden's long list

Whose vested interest? --more about Toyota's response to Channel 2

A vested interest

Now there are those of you, mainly lawyers I imagine, who might venture to guess that I commissioned an inaccurate translation of Toyota's over-the-top response to Channel 2, posted yesterday. So I will include the Hebrew original here for the record. (See below.) Translate it yourself if you doubt my translation.

I'd like to continue my light-hearted analysis of this response text by making two more comments. These are probably old hat to anyone who has read Toyota's public statements for the last several years, but anyway, maybe blog readers from Moldova, Madagascar, Nigeria, Argentina, China, Germany, or any one of dozens of other countries might find them fresh.

First we have the materially inaccurate statement "Toyota has won all lawsuits submitted to it in the US in this matter." Now where did you get that? If you were being truthful, you could have said "won or settled." "Settled in perfect secrecy" is really more accurate. But fidelity to the facts seems really too hard for you. Dear Toyota, I am so sorry you find it so tough.

Next, Toyota just loves to slap its critics with the "vested interests" smearing slap. Now why would Toyota do this? Frankly, I think it is to distract readers from the indisputable fact that Toyota itself has a vested interest in shutting up its critics. I would also like to point out that if Toyota meant moi, I could laugh in your face. The whole news story was about how I independently saw and understood documents, and the result of my actions in the public interest has been nothing but grinding poverty. What vested interests could you possibly be implying are behind this news story? GM? Duh, no. Plaintiffs? Duh, no. Government? Duh, no. Oh, maybe that I am about to sign a lucrative book deal? Duh, no. Those are facts. I dare you to try to uncover any facts to the contrary. No, Toyota, you are imagining things, and surely it is in your own vested interest to have a vivid imagination.

...
This response statement begs the question of how much accurate information about SUA is flowing from Toyota to government regulators and consumers in other countries outside the US. AFAIK, most countries outside of Europe and China lack their own auto safety regulations, and they rely on US standards or European standards. Many countries do not track consumer complaints either. So consumers have a much tougher job protecting themselves than they do in the US, and it isn't so easy there either. <Sigh>

A little more truth from Toyota would certainly help, anywhere in the world.

Toyota's response to Channel 2 - Hebrew original

Toyota disrespect for American jurors and judicial system

An unqualified jury

As I've reported here, earlier in 2014 Israel's Channel 2 broadcast a story about Toyota, SUA, and me. As is customary, Toyota's response statement came at the end of the news report. Naturally, it was provided in Hebrew. I had it translated by one of Israel's most respected Hebrew to English translators. See below.

Toyota says that the Bookout jury were not experts--implying that the jurors were in a technical muddle and didn't really understand what they were doing--when they found Toyota liable for Barbara Schwarz's death, Jean Bookout's injuries, and punitive damages for concealing the defects that caused them. Perhaps Toyota, oh so clever!, expected that its audience in Israel, where we have no jury system, would not know that Toyota's own defense counsel approved of every last one of those jurors. Personally, I don't say the US jury system is perfect, but this seems more than a little over the top for an organization still facing $3 billion in product liability lawsuits after admitting its criminal deception of consumers. Also, if the truth about Toyota's vehicle safety cannot be understood by an inexpert jury, but is so obvious to experts, then why did Toyota's experts not manage to effectively rebut Barr in the Bookout trial?

And Toyota keeps making the same unsupported claims of exoneration by government experts--remember, those are the very experts to whom the company lied. Toyota admitted lying to NHTSA about defects. Barr clearly showed how Toyota lied to NASA about its system designs. But Toyota  writes that there are "solid facts" that have proven the reliability and safety of its vehicles beyond all doubt.

Solid facts? Really? Good thing for your DPA compliance that you didn't say this in US media, guys.

Here is the text of the response statement with a comment by the translator that points out a key ambiguity in the source text terminology.

Shim fraud? Shim-shiminy shim-shiminy shim-shim shiree

A shim

Chim chim cheree - lucky as lucky can be....?

With thanks to Ralph and Sean.

Remember: Barbara Schwarz--"Mom was as good as gold"

Empty pajamas

Jere Beasley in closing arguments of Bookout, 

where he offers a glimpse into the depths of the Schwarz family's loss

Kind of weird: President Toyoda "did not know" about 400% spike in complaints

In your deposition, what were you thinking of?

"I know nothing!" 3 second video

Masterful attorney Jere Beasley, in Bookout opening arguments, describing how Toyoda denied knowledge of 400% spike in complaints after ETCS introduced:

Eye-popping 60,000 complaints, ignored

Eyes popped, don't see

Jere Beasley in opening arguments in Bookout:

...

Legal pie in the face

Chef #1 Tom and "Lisa" joined by Joel....get ready, set, aim, throw!

"Betsy" (avatar) has a pie of her own to throw

Back in Sderot, we are under fire only enough to have to run into the bomb shelter from time to time. It is relatively quiet for now. So I am back here again at my regular desk.

Meanwhile, I understand that a legal pie-slinging event happened overnight, in which various lawyers in a triangular arrangement undertook a secret discussion of my legal situation. I haven't yet learned what they said, but it must have been very interesting for them to compare and contrast the pies that each side wants to throw upon the others' faces, and perhaps also pies that they did throw or that they threatened to throw in the presence of the judge sometime soon. Or pies that they offered to catch! 

I have fallen into silence and now emerge a little, with allegory, about my subpoena legal situation. Silence has fallen because I was finally able to engage a lawyer equal to the task of facing off nicely with Toyota's lawyers at Skadden and now also with one from Bowman & Brooke. My brilliant, kind, but also quite savvy lawyer, may God bless him, got a nice running start from the facts that I wrote down when I was trying to be my own lawyer. I had been determined to be my own lawyer but was prvented by a few things. For one, California federal court rules prevent a non-lawyer from filing papers electronically. (Yes, its "back to the past" for us po' folk who have no lawyer.) So my only option from 7,600 miles away was to hire a local California "filing service" to send a guy on a bicycle with the papers to the courthouse and hand them over to the court clerk that way. Over the counter. And the cost of that, plus the cost of distributing the papers to all the many involved law firms, came to an astronomical price far exceeding the amount of cash that I can muster right now. But as I was learning of this road block, I also realized that I didn't know enough practical law to tell when dear Kevin and his fierce colleagues at Skadden were being total bullies or were being reasonable and ordinary. Lawyers at that level have their own kinds of negotiating games and everyone of course knows what they are and takes it in stride. But I did not think it wise or good for the public interest to play around on a playing field where I don't know the rules and the tactics. And so I decided that it was time for a bonafide lawyer. The upside of all this "law school" is that I did learn a lot about the legal processes, and I gained much empathy for SUA survivors who suffer through them for years after having lost loved ones.

If the preliminary pie-slinging does not resolve the outstanding issues, then we will see each other in court and the pies will get bigger and much more sour. If we get into court, it is SO PUBLIC. It is certainly good for the public interest to cast some sunshine on shadowy legal processes.  But just like for many plaintiffs with SUA lawsuits, it is not a simple decision to roll the dice in court.  So we will see. 

Back to Sderot

Sderot - menorah made of spent incoming rockets

We are going home today to Sderot even though it is under heavy fire.

The school year is starting soon, we are a little tired of being displaced persons.

We will be moving into our one-room bomb shelter that is built onto one end of the apartment, dashing out to the kitchen and other rooms as needed.

My son misses his dog, Smoothie.

So farewell, until I set up an office in the bomb shelter. I think wifi works in there but am not quite sure.

Driver error is an imperfect camouflage of the real causes of SUA

Nose cone shows

Boots stick out

Dang! red nose gives it away

Nice try...you are so cute, but that just doesn't work

Someone may end up in a glaring orange jumpsuit, 

....but it may not be the right person

Toyota engineer Takeshi Ogawa says there is NO TEST FOR UA

Omni-test?  ...doesn't exist

In blazingly sharp contrast to Jim Lentz's vague but sworn testimony made to the good congressman from Beverly Hills, Henry Waxman, for the TV cameras... to wit:

"I am relying on the information that I have received from Japan, that they are confident that testing has been done in Japan and they are confident that there are not issues with the ECU."

Now here comes engineer/manager Takeshi Ogawa, who said in his interview with U.S. House investigators, deep in the back offices of a House office building, far from the cameras, verbatim: 

"There is no particular or special testing that would directly prove that there is no unintended acceleration."

Which is true?

And here is Dr. Koopman, on the stand, speaking of Toyota's witness Ishii:

Toyota's Ogawa's "beliefs" vs. expert Michel Mardiguian: "A liar, or naïve"

Naïve  - ??

Toyota engineer Ogawa interview with U.S. House investigators in 2010. Mr. Ogawa was warned by House counsel at the start of this interview that untrue answers carry criminal liability.

From Michel Mardiguian, of Paris, France, renowned EMC expert who often works for the auto industry:

“Electromagnetic interference leaves no trace, it goes away just as it came.” “An automaker who declares bluntly that uncontrolled acceleration cannot be caused by electromagnetic interference because they have fully tested their vehicle is a liar, or naïve.

******************************************

Also:

From Ron Brewer, NARTE Certified EMC Engineer, IEEE EMC Society Distinguished Lecturer. Ron works on the EMC of the Space Shuttle and other space vehicles.

“…there is no way by testing to duplicate all the possible combinations of frequencies, amplitudes, modulation waveforms, spatial distributions, and relative timing of the many simultaneous interfering signals that an operating system may encounter. As a result, it’s going to fail.” 

From Alexandre Boyer, et al  

“Although electronic components must pass a set of EMC tests to (help) ensure safe operations, the evolution of EMC over time is not characterized and cannot be accurately forecast.” 

From Dr I D Flintoff 

“As indicated in [2] narrow-band threat fields with simple modulations are no longer necessarily representative of the EMI which causes the failure in digital systems.”

(Note: “narrow-band threat fields with simple modulations” is exactly how automotive radiated immunity testing is done.) 

From IEC TS 61000-1-2, Ed 2, December 2008 

“In most cases there is no simple or practicable way to check and to verify by means of testing or measuring that immunity is achieved for the safety-related system in its entirety with respect to other systems, equipment or the external electromagnetic environment for all operating conditions and operating modes.”

“This is due to the fact that not every combination of operating conditions, of operating modes and of electromagnetic phenomena acting on the system can be achieved in a reasonable way and in a reasonable period.”

For a detailed explanation of why EMC testing cannot be sufficient (i.e. on its own) to demonstrate that EMI in the operating environment cannot be a cause of unacceptable functional safety risks, read the first chapter in the IET’s 2008 Guide.[34]

*******************************

With attribution and special thanks to EurIng Keith Armstrong, the indomitable genius of functional safety and EMC standards who is one of Toyota's target experts in the very extensive subpoena documents request list, and also to his colleagues Drs. Anderson and Kirk, his co-authors of a paper on automotive electronics safety. More about that tomorrow.

Great coaching, Ted Hester, Jim Lentz says "testing has been done."

A "zikit," otherwise known as a chameleon

Here is a beautifully composed (misleading but probably not quite perjurious?) statement under oath by Jim Lentz in 2010. Jim, trying his very best after he raised his hand and swore to tell the truth, uttered it to Rep. Henry Waxman and colleagues during hearings before the U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee. It is in the public transcript of the hearing.

"I am relying on the information that I have received from Japan, that they are confident that testing has been done in Japan and they are confident that there are not issues with the ECU.    ... We have looked into the electronics. And based on the testing we have done in Japan and now Exponent... we have not found a malfunction."

The purporedly reliable information from Japan was extracted from Messrs. Ogawa and Kishi, two Toyota engineers who were interviewed by House counsel at around the same time. Stay tuned for the next post, where you will read what they had to say.

We've already learned just how much Congress and the public could rely on the good-faith cooperation and whole-truth statements about Exponent's testing, courtesy of Dr. Shukri Souri. (See a previous post.)

Remember - Peter Lagakos, Regina Lagakos, Helen Lagakos, Stephen Krause

Remember

This post is in memory of a man who used his statistical skills to uncover corporate midconduct that adversely impacted public health. And to remember that there was a Toyota Highlander involved in his and his family's untimely deaths.

Date: Oct. 13, 2009

Victims: Stephen Lagakos, Regina Lagakos, Helen Lagakos, Stephen Krause

Location: Peterborough, N.H.

Model: 2005 Toyota Highlander

Details: Stephen Lagakos, his wife, Regina Lagakos, and his mother, 94-year-old Helen Lagakos, were returning from a birthday celebration at the family's lakeside country house in Rindge, N.H., when other motorists observed Lagakos' 2005 Highlander traveling at high speed, passing other vehicles erratically in the breakdown lane, according to a complaint filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration .

All three were killed when the Toyota collided with a Chevrolet Malibu on U.S. 202 near Peterborough. The driver of the Malibu, 56-year-old Stephen Krause of Keene, N.H., also died.

Reported by friends and family to be an exceptionally experienced and safe driver, Stephen Lagakos, 63, was a professor at Harvard University's School of Public Health. Colleagues said his work in statistical science was critical to unraveling environmental mysteries, including the contaminated water wells of Woburn, Mass., a toxic site that was the subject of the 1996 bestseller "A Civil Action " by Jonathan Harr,which was later made into a movie starring John Travolta.

The NHTSA complaint filed in January by Marvin Zelen, Lagakos' boss, suggested that the accident was caused by sudden unintended acceleration. Zelen wrote that Lagakos was a careful driver with an excellent safety record.

"I had been in his car with him hundreds of times. Very safe driver -- no cowboy," the report said. "Believe car had uncontrolled acceleration."

LA Times stories of Toyota dead, page 8

Jerusalem

Jerusalem

A moment away from SUA...

I am writing from one of the stone houses in the background of the city there.

In days of yore, we could build simple stone walls for protection from enemies. No more. 

Remember Kent Fly: On the streets of Chicago

 Kent Fly gone, in Chicago

LA Times remembers the Toyota SUA dead
Date: Aug. 26, 2008

Victim: Kent Fly

Location: Chicago

Model: 2006 Lexus ES330

Details: Willette Green said she was heading to work in her Lexus, driving northbound along Interstate 94 in the Chicago area, when she applied the brakes to merge into the right lane. But rather than slowing, she said, the car accelerated out of her control, off the freeway and onto surface streets.

"The car kept getting faster and faster and when I looked up all I could see were red lights," said Green, now 62. "I was just hitting everything in front of me."

The car barreled through a fence and hit a concrete pillar before finally coming to a stop. But not before striking a pedestrian, Kent Fly, who died days later, according to his lawyer.

Green was injured and could not return to work for two months.

"My back, my neck, my arms," she said, felt "like somebody beat me up."

Green said Toyota inspected her smashed car then sent her a letter stating there was no mechanical failure.

Green was cited for speeding, but faced no criminal charges. An attorney who represented Fly said the family sued Green's insurance company and reached a settlement.

Green said she has retained a lawyer and sued Toyota, claiming negligence and product liability.

The Lexus ES330 in not included in Toyota's recent recalls.


When I'm dead and buried, don't you weep after me

Didgeridoo lessons

A loud blast to the hard-of-hearing in New York

And more "law school" lessons....

“Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.” 18 U.S. Code § 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television

Obstruction of Justice by Deception 
In addition to the obstruction of justice provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1503 and 1512, four other general 
statutes outlaw obstructing the government’s business by deception. Three involve perjury: 18 
U.S.C. 1623 which outlaws false swearing before federal courts and grand juries; 18 U.S.C. 1621 
the older and more general prohibition that proscribes false swearing in federal official matters 
(judicial, legislative, or administrative); and 18 U.S.C. 1622 which condemns subornation, that is, 
inducing another to commit perjury. The fourth, 18 U.S.C. 1001, proscribes material false 
statements concerning any matter within the jurisdiction of a federal executive branch agency, 
and to a somewhat more limited extent within the jurisdiction of the federal courts or a 

congressional entity. 

An interesting concept--Snowden's dead man's switch

Snowden's Dead Man's Switch

Edward Snowden has set up a dead man's switch. He's distributed encrypted copies of his document trove to various people, and has set up some sort of automatic system to distribute the key, should something happen to him.

Dead man's switches have a long history, both for safety (the machinery automatically stops if the operator's hand goes slack) and security reasons. WikiLeaks did the same thing with the State Department cables.

"It's not just a matter of, if he dies, things get released, it's more nuanced than that," he said. "It's really just a way to protect himself against extremely rogue behavior on the part of the United States, by which I mean violent actions toward him, designed to end his life, and it's just a way to ensure that nobody feels incentivized to do that."

I'm not sure he's thought this through, though. I would be more worried that someone would kill me in order to get the documents released than I would be that someone would kill me to prevent the documents from being released. Any real-world situation involves multiple adversaries, and it's important to keep all of them in mind when designing a security system.