TABLE OF CONTENTS As with formal methods, the field of software engineering contains a great many miracle cures, making it rather difficult to determine which techniques are worthy of further investigation. There are currently around 300 software engineering standards, and yet the state of most software currently being produced indicates that they either don't work or are being ignored (the number of faults per 1000 lines of code, a common measure of software quality, has remained almost constant over the last 15 years). This is of little help to someone trying to find techniques suitable for constructing trustworthy systems.
For example, two widely-touted software engineering panaceas are the Software Engineering Institute's capability maturity model (CMM) and the use of CASE tools. Studies are only now being carried out to determine whether organisations at level n + 1 of the CMM produce software that is any better than organisations at level n (in other words, whether the CMM actually works) [147]. One study that has been completed could find "no relationship between any dimension of maturity and the quality of RE [Requirements Engineering] products. [ ] These findings do not adequately support the hypothesised strong relationship between organisational maturity and RE success" [148]. Another report cites management's "decrease in motivation from lack of a clear link between their visions of the business and the progress achieved" after they initiated CMM programs [149]. Of particular relevance to implementers wanting to build trustworthy systems, a...
