In light of this paper from NIST. How comfortable is everyone with the inventory and assessment accomplished at your facilities?. http://www.nist.gov/y2k/embeddedarticle.htm

-- Anonymous, December 09, 1999

Answers

i found these particular paragraphs most enlightening... while i was reading it this old song started running through my head.

i'll sing a few bars... "it's too late baby, now it's too late, though we really did try to make it."

carole king if my memory serves me correctly.

text:

Embedded systems testing is not an easy task to accomplish. Various factors play into this including the following:

Unknown embedded devices located in sealed units and components within components.

Devices with known problems that have not yet been remediated.

Difficulty in working on embedded devices because of the environment, such as those located within hazardous areas.

Hard-wired embedded components that cannot be replaced due to design issues or lack of replacement parts.

Firmware or software that has been patched, but not documented.

Lack of source code for software used in the embedded device.

Lack of a means of setting date and time, i.e., no apparent real-time clock calendar or no data entry mechanism.

Date usage that is not apparent and consequently overlooked.

This last factor is especially pernicious since many embedded devices use real-time clock calendars that were developed during the 1960s, 70s, 80s, and early 90s when the date and time were used as a single string consisting of year, month, day, hours, minutes, seconds, etc. in the form YYMMDDhhmmss. Using this type of embedded device, calculating elapsed times required the use of the date in addition to time.Later devices provided the date in the form of an epoch or base date, and a counter of elapsed units of time, typically seconds, since the epoch. For example, with a base date of 01/01/80 and a counter with the value 31,536,000 seconds, we could compute the date as 01/01/81. Elapsed time calculations using the counter were performed with a straightforward subtraction of the start count from the end count. The date played no part in elapsed time calculations.

Embedded devices that do not apparently use dates in elapsed time calculations are being ignored in some embedded systems testing. This is a major oversight in the testing process since there are still embedded devices in existence that do not use the epoch and counter method, but the older date and time method.

never in human history have so many humans blindly trusted that so many other humans won't screw up.

ed yardeni

-- Anonymous, December 09, 1999

I'm no expert, mind you, but because of my 'status', when the topic turns to Y2k, folks always ask me for my assessment. When it comes to embedded systems problems I tell them that my understanding is that looking for and fixing embedded systems is a lot like vacuuming in the dark. You can cover all the floor but you'll never really know if you've gotten all the dirt until the lights come on.

Now, in this analogy, the lights start coming on Jan. 1. That's when utility companies will start seeing the true results of their labor. As I understand Rick's assessment, Y2k remediation in the utility industry has always been a mixed bag, with some companies being very diligent, i.e. vacuuming the same spot over and over just in case something was missed; while others have done just a quick once- through in the areas where the most 'dirt' in known to gather.

So, in my mind, the NIST findings are already known to the diligent. The others, well, only the light will tell.

-- Anonymous, December 10, 1999

Charlie,

Well, there's vacuums and there's vacuums. I have seen a few demos of some *really* expensive vacuums right in the house. Like Kirby. The guy has you vacuum (in the light) with your own cleaner, then he takes his Kirby (with a special filter disc) and goes over the same spot you just thought you cleaned. The filter disc shows a lot more dirt and junk. So I guess it's like remediation and then getting a good IV&V afterward. Kind of raises your eyebrows, better believe it.

Now, about embeddeds. I'm sure there *are* a few people who know how to test one. Just like there are people who know how to test a TV that is acting up, and replace only the tiny circuit that is bad. But you know what, you aren't likely to run into one of those TV pros. No, what they do is make a few small tests and then replace the entire board that is bad. So they never actually got to the individual chippy thing that was at fault. Replace it all. And that's what is going on in those industries that are heavy in the embedded stuff. Except, they are only testing a few, and replacing a few *because* the stuff is so expensive AND there is no real guarantee that the new one is any better than the old one was. They won't know about the new one until they test that too, if they know how to test it, and if it doesn't have some "hidden" clock lurking in it somewhere. As NIST says, the fact that there is no obvious clock function showing doesn't mean there isn't a clock ticking away in it anyway, just waiting for some rollover to do it in. A fine kettle of fish, or as Stan used to say: "It's a fine mess you got us into now, Ollie."

-- Anonymous, December 10, 1999