Here the state also provides backing to a voting machine manufacturer and keeps the inspection reports under lock and key due to alleged protection of know-how:
That the BMI keeps the inspection reports under lock and key weighs heavily, especially in light of a waiver of an additional vote recording independent of the electronics, criticizes Wiesner: "Neither the voter nor the election committee in the polling station can determine which software is actually used in the polling station and how secure the devices used are against manipulation." Consequently, the form for the election record does not even provide for the alleged program version to be recorded.
For me, this is just as dubious as the same nonsense in the USA. Voting computers must - if they are to be trustworthy - withstand public discussion. The alleged know-how protection of the manufacturer must not be valued higher than the citizen's right to information on how the vote counting is conducted. It is simply absurd what the BMI is doing here - but what else can one expect from the authority of Otto Orwell?