We have source-code verificaton and results-testing as the two options for software verification. With results-testing, the credibility of the results is the issue: are they genuine results, or faked by the casino / tester? If that is established / establisheable, then you can move forward. With this alternative, that problem is removed, but there are others (please humour me if these questions are in any way irrelevant):
Caruso replies: insofar as my thoughts were originally put in place with that discussion - yes.
Caruso wrote: how regularly is the code tested? how is one guarenteed that the "fair" code you examine is the same code run by the operator?
Caruso wrote: Is code-testing foolproof? - meaning, a code which "passes inspection" cannot then entertain the possibility that non-random numbers may still be generated? Can a "fair" code not be somehow bypassed?
Caruso replies: I think I'm making progress here: basically, both casino and customer run the application, and we can both see the numbers generated by Fairdice. At any time, I can view the log file to verify that MY Fairdice number is identical to the casino Fairdice number. While these numbers remain identical, the casino is generating random numbers; if there is a discrepancy, they are not. In other words: provided that the Fairdice software I'm running at my end is verified as good, and that both my numbers and casino numbers match, there is no possibility that the casino is not generating non-random numbers. Is that correct?
Caruso wrote: Do you consider source-code verification a better alternative to result-testing? If so, why? And the old chestnut: What guarentees is it possible to offer the consumer (me) that you are on the level and that your pronouncements may be trusted?