content: Closed source software used to determine whether or not a person's biomarkers match those found at a crime scene can lead to false positives, and because the source code is closed source, an independent third party can't look to verify that the algorithms are valid.  Essentially it's a black box, and without open source, you can't know for sure what the internal algorithm is, or how it's being used. It would be like being told they have "proof" that you were at the scene of a crime but they can't tell you how they know it, except "our scientific instruments determined it was you" but the exact procedure used in the software to make that determination is "secret".  This is a gross oversimplification, but with closed source software increasingly being misunderstood, misused, or exploited and manipulated, it's in the public interest to keep things open source.  Closed source software is like having a secret tribunal with no court record.  It is vulnerable to abuse because there is no transparency, only claims of being "fair and balanced" or "scientifically accurate" which are just buzz words that cannot be examined without looking in the black box to see the source code.