The current version of WA employment security dept software was deployed in 2017. It was a boondoggle that cost taxpayers ~$50mm.
edit-to-add-link: https://www.king5.com/article/news/investigations/years-late...
The current version of WA employment security dept software was deployed in 2017. It was a boondoggle that cost taxpayers ~$50mm.
edit-to-add-link: https://www.king5.com/article/news/investigations/years-late...
If I recall correctly it is also a third party solution provided by a private company. Oregon plans to adopt the same software after not being able to make payments at all for quite some time due to their own antiquated software [0].
From an article I read at the time:
Keiser said Fast Enterprises has since blamed ESD for the lack of fraud protection because the ESD “didn’t purchase additional security” that Fast Enterprises could have offered. [1]
Seems unbelievable given the expense. At the time I wrote OPB and said.
While I think it is a good thing to choose readymade software rather than developing something new and potentially fail to deliver anything, I feel that Oregon is not paying attention to what is happening on the other side of the Columbia river and is potentially making the same mistakes as Washington.
[0] https://www.opb.org/article/2020/09/10/oregon-employment-dep...
[1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/technical-error-helped...
The problem is that it takes real budgets and effort to build these highly complex systems. It requires teams of competent engineers that are willing to take the extra steps to ensure the systems they're building/connecting are managed in a security-positive manner. When these sort of projects are bid out it's usually the bottom-dollar bidder and/or whoever has the most "good ol' boy" connections; this often doesn't correlate to the previously stated need for technical competency.
Also there's the problem of talent. Private vs. public sector development firms typically pay out on different scales for similar work/stress loads.
All of this is anecdotal but I'm so not surprised.
This often freezes out local innovators in favor of large national contractors that specialize in fubar government projects.
Given that this cost is of the order of the fraud you think it would have prevented if it had been done "right", maybe they were spending too little.