Some thoughts on Anon and hacking and all that (as well as the culture)

[nadinbrzezinski]

So will try to spell this out.

Hackers, by their very nature, are not very trusting of officer friendly. There are good reasons. They break the law regularly. So, if ANON indeed do this, they will not go out and call officer friendly and tell him, or her. look, we got the goods on Rove, as long as you promise, cross your heart NOT to prosecute us... not even with a lawyer present.

Also, at least in California, evidence obtained while in the commission of a crime is usually not used, since... what are the words the judges like to use... oh yes, it is contaminated evidence. Maybe, where you live this happens often. But here, they like to avoid it, or use it ONLY if they have OTHER STRONGER as in MUCH STRONGER, legally obtained, read warrant, evidence.

There is one more thing. I am not saying, contrary to popular opinion, that Anon went out and did it. Their letter is tantalizing assuming it is Anon, since it has plausible events on it, that MATCH what we know from actual MEDIA coverage, read Ars Technica and other geeky sites.

What we know is that Orca was a badly designed app, using Microsoft for part of it's architecture (sloppy). We know that MS is infamous for a few back doors, designed into their products, Access is particularly bad, a product like this, I am assuming will need a Dbase app, and Access happen to be a Dbase app. Lord knows I am not a programmer but I know enough to know that. There is a reason why I would never recommend Access...

We also know is that the afternoon of the election the ISP for the campaign did shut down inbound traffic temporarily thinking they were undergoing a Denial of Service Attack. This could be sloppy programing, it could be an actual attack, or both. I don't think we'll ever know.

We also know the Users of the system were having all kinds of issues signing to the site, getting credentials and all that... we know some credential were issued that should not. That is suggestive of hacking.

We also know Karl Rove melted on Fox... I got to watch that with a bunch of republicans return night. and trust me, they were just as shocked as Karl. And in a few cases I am talking of county high level officials. It could be (this is taking the haking angle) him realizing that something was not going according to plan, or just he blew up 300 plus million. Your mileage will vary.

We also know two machines were taken off service in PA after they were recorded actually flipping the votes... CNN ran that tape, later on MSNBC. I am going to assume that this never really happen and it was the FX department at CNN...

Now all these are actual facts. Does this mean all this indicates we had hackers playing around with the system and saving the US from another stolen election? The technology exists, it is indeed possible. Can I prove it? Just as much as you really cannot prove it did not happen.

Here is a hint, yes, I have actually talked with a few hackers over the years... they are good enough these days that they will leave code behind that will errase their presence. Why I keep saying, read Neuromancer. we are there. Oh and just for fun, assuming this was a hack, the next presidential election the shadows will be even more amusing. If it was not, well I suspect Microsoft will not be used for the main architecture just in case. And that lesson should apply to BOTH parties.

If it was just a set of coincidences, well they do happen. Why I am saying it could be, not that it did, there is a difference. I know better, but I also know that this fixation on our perfect electoral system is just annoying as hell, since the system has much more obvious problems, as in real obvious... nine hours to vote... you shit me?

But serious, you think Occupiers (with good reason) distrust the authorities? You have never met a hacker. For the record the bottles of mountain dew and cheetos are not just part of the myth. Nor are the full cups of coffee, and other forms of fast food. And for some... it is the challenge of the hack... not what they get physically out of it. They are not doing it to get info out... it is... a very different mindset.

(It was part of a response, but damn it, here is a full fledge response... suffice it to say, I am not going to scream and insist that Anon saved the US from itself, but will not deny the possibility exists, like some folks are doing)

[Kingofalldems]

1. Kick and Rec

Here we go

[Coyotl]

17. Here we go again!

[DirkGently]

2. The Anon hates "officer friendly" argument has no legs.

Anonymous and Wikileaks don't need the authorities to put proof out there. Plenty of journalists would leap at any plausible evidence of vote tampering. And in the past, that's exactly what they've done.

It was quite simple, for example, for Anon to post the HBGary e-mails online. No need to sit down with the Powers That Be and convince them of anything. Post it online, hand it to the press. Done. No need to jump through a single legal hoop or trust a single seat of power.

That's the beauty, and the power, of hacking and leaking to expose. Simply weaving a story, with zero backing, would be an unprecedented way for anyone who had uncovered something so big to behave.

So the argument that these super-competent hackers would rely on a totally unsupported internet video to reveal the results of the biggest hactivism story in history is 100% bullshit.

Of course it's possible, AND tantalizing, that something actually happened here, because it would confirm all sorts of things people suspect of Rove, and because he DID look like his remote wasn't working when he flipped out on Fox.

A simpler explanation would be that Rove, who in addition to being slimy, fancies himself the keeper of "the math," was wrong, again.

I'll await further developments with everyone else convinced that Rove is an unindicted co-conspirator. But we just look silly when we start talking in the pseudo-religious terms of the right, which requires no facts to draw its conclusions. Remember, the NRA made the "no evidence is evidence" argument regarding Obama and gun control. "The fact he didn't do it ... just proves he's going to do it?"

We're smarter than that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. People are asking them why are they not going to the authorites

so just answering that part of the angle. And that part of the angle is real. Live with it, or not, I really could care less.

Now if they have evidence and decide to share it... I suspect the candidate for the information bomb will not be the old gray Lady, but Der Spiegel.

And yes, we are smarter than this. Why some of us are looking at all these coincidences and realizing that there is a possibility... not closing our eyes and minds to the mere probablity. You are free to do that.

Oh and it is not asking, people on this board are DEMANDING they show the goods.

[DirkGently]

6. I just think evidence is a requirement for belief.

"Going to the authorities" and "providing a scintilla of positive proof" got conflated in an earlier thread.

It's just best to stay clear. The supposed Anon video has the aspect of urban myth. It confirms multiple beliefs and fervent wishes regarding Rove, and is a natural place to go from his entitled freak-out on Fox. Doesn't mean it's false, but there's no basis to assume it's true at this point.

ORCA provides another interesting element. I think it would be more plausible that it was interfered with than that a vote-flipping scheme was thwarted. It's also plausible that by waiting until the last second to fire it up, Republicans just screwed the proverbial pooch.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. For those of us who understand this

there is suggestive evidence in the media reports.

The strongest are two fold.

1.- The Denial of Service attack. This can easily be used to get from under your security protocols and not let you do your stuff. It also explains the problems users were having.

2.- The issuing of credentials to those who were not authorized. Translation, somebody hacked a password.

By no means am I saying it actually happened... and the only way we could really find out is if all the servers, and I mean every last one, is turned over to specialists and we have a careful examination of every drive to the last piece of data.

Now if they were planning to use it that way... they would be found. I do not think Mitt has any intention of spending a few years in the clink for vote fraud. If they were not penetrated, then they have nothing to lose but bad programing architecture. Why go through the expense of such unless you intend to sue? This level of forensics, which would give you the evidence to a level of certainty you would accept, is not cheap.

Also I will be honest, I do not think ORCA was the backbone of the operation... a phone app simply does not have the oompth to do that. And yes, it was lousy programing. It was the tip of the spear as it were though.

Also the fact that the OH servers went down at the same time they did in 2004 are just way too much of a coincidence.

But for many reasons we will not know. One party really has no reason to do the forensics and the other... well, assuming they are actually involved, have no motivation beyond what they (assuming the letter was real) already did.

[HipChick]

12. DDOS can be created by overloading service requests by users

a malfunctioning SSO - Signal Sign On, can look like credentials not authorized...

Even annual Defcon attendee's are laughing at this...its reaching, and nothing that cannot be easily duplicated.. Anon are being giving way too much credit on this..

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Why I said it could also be lousy programing

Just pointing the two best candidates.

[JaneyVee]

30. Pretty sure DOS is only possible through hacking.

[Ohio Joe]

60. Incorrect

The DDoS attack is misusing tools created for load balancing... JMeter, Charles... Other such tools. 'Hackers' do not dabble in DDoS attacks, script kiddies do.

[jeff47]

27. Sigh

1.- The Denial of Service attack. This can easily be used to get from under your security protocols and not let you do your stuff. It also explains the problems users were having.

Please stop.

Or I'll start dispensing legal advice that makes as little sense as that sentence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. You could always like ignore

Or trash thread.

[jeff47]

51. I prefer for ignorance to not spread. (nt)

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Like access is not a database

snicker...

[jeff47]

81. It's a good thing you plastered your error over and over again.

Makes it really look like you know what you're doing.

Oh wait, when asked to back that up, you decided to put me on ignore.

[pintobean]

82. You just can't take a hint.

She just wanted a

[jeff47]

83. Pfft. Twix is the right answer.

Especially Peanut Butter Twix.

[pintobean]

85. Crunchy

[defacto7]

4. Thanks Nadin

One thing that sometimes gets lost in these discussions about Anon. Anon can't give evidence because Anon doesn't really exist... and it does exist. It is not an entity or a company or consortium or an organization of any kind. It's just there, a bunch of people who don't even know each other that have some common and not so common goals, and a convoluted way of communicating when necessary. Some come together for a purpose and others do not. No one can speak for them even though someone speaks up once in a while. And they all speak when necessary.

It's very ambiguous and convoluted, and it's meant to be that way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Yeah, it is an electronic version of a cell system

some cells have two people, most have one.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. The cell system plus global press announcements?

I'm not a big fan of undocumented allegations against even my dearest enemy. 'I have in my hand a list of names' said Senator McCarthy. Claimed he had all these commies in the administration. No proof. Just allegations.
If good people did do such a thing and did feel they could not dare actually prove the crime for whatever reason, I'm sure they understand that such choices do come with a certain asterisk to the credibility of the story and feel it is worth it.
The main reason I am not fond of this story is that it takes the huge accomplishment of millions of dedicated voting Americans and claims it was not them that won the election, it was some 'hackers' who did it. This story says 'if not for Anon the election would be lost' and it says this without any proof. That's wreckless. And it holds the voters in contempt. It is a message that if belived could destroy turn out for us. What if Anon wants to make a deal with the GOP next time? What if this is not a warning, but a calling card?
Also, myself and about 100 people I know called the Sec of State and Governors of Ohio and Florida and said 'we are so watching you and if you cheat we will not remain silent'. I could assume that our pressure was that which 'stopped them from stealing it'. I could then ask for a donation to me. That is, if I was a self promoting hack. I mean hacker.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Have you ever studied the IRA

and Shin Fein? Same logic.

The IRA did it's stuff. but Shin Fein ran a very good PR organization. The beauty of it is that Shin Fein leaders rarely (until very late in the game) knew who the leaders of the IRA were.

And in my mind it takes nothing from the voters or volunteers. Now let's play along. What if it was stolen? What if votes were flipped in critical places and we were talking of a President Romney administration. I think if that happened. that would be taking away from Americans and hard working volunteers, than having a group of hackers making sure that did not happen and making sure the election remained loyal to the intent of the voters.

But hey, that is just me. Preserving the integrity of the vote vs having it stolen... maybe I got my priorities off.



by the way, you are confusing Wiki Leaks with Anon. Last time I checked Anon has yet to raise one buck in donations.

[villager]

11. +1

Good distinctions, well said!

[defacto7]

16. No one will ever know

if Anon had anything to do with it; it's all just talk. It's that simple. There is no stealing from the voters. Are the Anons of the US, citizens as well? Do they vote? Do they have vested interests in our America any less than you or I? No. They are doing what they need to do just like the rest of us.

Again, there is a mix up of who Anon is. They are people. They are not making money or remuneration of any kind from their net endeavors; "they" can't, because "they" are not an organization. They are just digital actions.

[starroute]

24. There is one possible way we might find out

Anonymous is set to unveil their "Project Tyler" in December, which they've described as being like an open source version of WikiLeaks.

In the long run, I'm not sure that can work. I think whistleblowing does need some curating. But in the short run, it might spring some stuff loose -- or provide cover for certain people to disseminate certain kinds of information.

In any case, I'm looking forward to it.

[defacto7]

25. There's always a danger...

anytime a project centralizes efforts, strings are created between sources that purely by probability could leave strange trails; leaks can spray both ways. If there is a general weakness with Anon, I would imagine it would be youthful over confidence that, in other circles, has been known to cause untidy mistakes. Open source huh? That can mean a lot of things.

I would think that anyone who wants to stay stealthy should think carefully when considering "projects" of any lasting nature.

Now where's that quantum IC I put in the fish bowl the other day???

[Tutonic]

8. K and R

This post ROCKS

[Left coast liberal]

13. I think it probably happened. So, thanks Anon. We owe you one!

[starroute]

15. Or just maybe they want to let Rove twist slowly in the wind

What I'm getting from looking around online is that Rove is in a peck of trouble. His billionaire backers feel burned. The Tea Partiers and movement conservatives feel betrayed. He's in possible legal trouble over his failure to register his PACs properly in Virginia. And at this point, he has no way of knowing whether Anonymous has provided anything to the Feds or not.

All of that is a good thing. I would rather have Rove be discredited and demoralized than see him on trial for something that might not be provable and would at the very least enable him to play the martyr. In fact, I want him squirming. I want him not knowing what might happen to him next and fearing the worst.

And if Anonymous has put Rove in that position -- whether through an actual hack or through a brilliant hoax -- that can only be a good thing.


On edit: It's not for nothing that one of Anonymous's mottos is "Because none of us is as cruel as all of us." Once they get going, they turn into something like the avenging Furies of Greek mythology, and they don't let go until their victim is shredded into tiny bits.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. No, we will never know

This takes the kind of very expensive forensics nobody wants to do, if this actually happened. Rove and mitt don't want to spend time in jail, and the hackers, assuming this happended, already got what they wanted.

If it did not, mitt might want to, in order to sue.

[2naSalit]

32. That's very

close to what I think. If they have that SOB squirming and looking over his shoulder, I'm totally good with that. IF they actually had something to do with the DoS and maybe more, I'm also good with that because I think he was attempting another 2004. I remember that well and how we seemed to lose (at least three that I recall) important people around election time for two election cycles who were not friends of hamRove. Anyone who was suspect in outing him found their way to the other side via small aircraft crashes.

If they had any way to hack his info lines of whatever kind, I hope they keep it up and haunt the piss out of him. And how would anyone know whether his misdeeds have been documented and turned over to the feds? It's only two weeks since the event and the turn-over of electeds won't take place for another 8 weeks. Never know if someone's waiting for that to take place first, or even some new members of the SCOTUS... All possibilities. And who here would know if DoJ is already looking at it or not? It's not like they make national announcements when they investigate someone at this level. Besides, hamRove may just slip up and expose himself or maybe one of his disgruntled benefactors will. Many possibilities and I'm sure not going to discard most of them until later on. Have patience.

The more that pig squirms, the easier it will be to set him off balance enough to blow it in public in a much clearer manner than he did on TeeVee on election night that he thought he had in the bag.

[Myrina]

48. ^ this, for the win.

Thank you .

[Coyotl]

18. Now all that is needed is an iota of evidence, right?

Lots of conjectures built on belief does not add up to a single iota of evidence.

Of course Rove melted. He was being defeated LIVE on global television.
Imagine how Romney acted! His head probably exploded.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Tell me what part of the FACTS I Posted are not

Those facts lead to a POSSIBILITY. or you are having reading comprehension issues?

Or are you telling me Ars Technica, CNN/ MSNBC made all this shit up? Like the denial of service, the certificates, the machines filmed changing votes? In fact, Karl Rove is actually more circumstantial to this than those other hard facts. I admit, it's possible given where technology is today.

It's aso possible we had some of the worst programing in the history of programing leading to what looked like a denial of service attack and certificates issues... Why I wrote it is possible. Where did I say likely? And what exactly did I mischaracterize the hacker culture?

Here is your problem, you are ignoring a few facts because you insist that none of this is even possible outside a movie script in the United States. Where do you think writers get ideas from? Yup, that thing called real life.

Welcome to it...it is really not that scary.

But there is far more evidence in this one, as in actually reported in like actual major media, than a birth certificate.

[reusrename]

86. I honestly hope you are sucessful in reasoning with these people.

There are several folks that keep mocking others about the electronic vote flipping. I find the behavior abhorrent, mainly because I deeply believe in the voice of the people, as expressed at the polls. I do wish some folks would at least respect the voting process itself enough to refrain from the mocking behavior.

We see this kind of thing a lot, people who have no understanding of science mocking those who do understand it. It's different in this case, at least to me it is. Voting is something I try to hold sacred, so this crap is unusually offensive to me in this partcular case. I'm also suspicious at what look to me like repeated intentional attempts to cloud and confuse the issues. I do understand that some good people are just a little bit stoopid, and that as such they may not be able to comprehend my feelings about this, even after I've repeated myself several tmes.

No one who understands the facts of 2012 has any doubt that votes were electronically flipped during the Republican primaries in order to eliminate each front runner, one by one, and secure the nomination for Gov. Romney.

For some reason, the vote in the general election was not electronically flipped to Romney. These are just the facts.

An additional fact: the pollsters who correctly predicted the electronically flipped races in the primary were also predicting a Romney win in the general.

Whether Anonymous had anything to do with this outcome is a legitimate question for speculation. We shouldn't conflate speculation about Anonymous in the general election with actual facts of electronic vote flipping in primary. One is speculation, the other is well-documented history.

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. I actually do not think any of us will be able to have an adult discussion

They have a stake in really clean elections.

[reusrename]

88. I've been considering writing a letter to the president, I wish someone would do it.

Remember how Kennedy created the President's Council on Physical Fitness? I would like Obama to create a similar council on democracy.

High school kids would participate in exit polling. Elementary kids would learn about voter suppression and the Voting Rights Act.

I think it would relieve a lot of angst about not witnessing clean elections.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. Go for it

It is not a bad idea actually.

[ananda]

20. Very well parsed out!

..

[Dash87]

22. Two points:

1 - That election story was total garbage. Anyone could make a story like that up.

2 - "Hacker" culture is about the pursuit of knowledge. All others are just script kids.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Number two

Was exactly what I was thinking. The hack itself.

[jeff47]

26. You need to do a lot more thinking

Hackers, by their very nature, are not very trusting of officer friendly. There are good reasons. They break the law regularly. So, if ANON indeed do this, they will not go out and call officer friendly and tell him, or her. look, we got the goods on Rove, as long as you promise, cross your heart NOT to prosecute us... not even with a lawyer present.

Because it would be beyond their skills to send an anonymous email with their evidence, which could provide enough information to launch an investigation and lead to warrants even without their testimony.

So we've got master hackers that can't manage to set up a fake gmail account.

And said super-hackers are also incapable of posting the actual information anywhere on the Internet. They're able to upload video, but no actual proof.

Their letter is tantalizing assuming it is Anon, since it has plausible events on it, that MATCH what we know from actual MEDIA coverage, read Ars Technica and other geeky sites.

No, their letter consists of technical terms strung together. It doesn't actually make any sense. Saying "habeus corpus" doesn't make my post MATCH what is in Yale Law Review.

What we know is that Orca was a badly designed app, using Microsoft for part of it's architecture (sloppy).

Microsoft products, in and of themselves, are not terrible. They are frequently deployed in a terrible manner by poorly trained Microsoft "certified" personnel.

Access is particularly bad, a product like this, I am assuming will need a Dbase app, and Access happen to be a Dbase app.

This statement is especially face-palm inducing. First, the relevant Microsoft product is SQL Server. Second, Access can't do what Ars describes. Third, how exactly does using Access MATCH what is in Ars?

We also know is that the afternoon of the election the ISP for the campaign did shut down inbound traffic temporarily thinking they were undergoing a Denial of Service Attack. This could be sloppy programing, it could be an actual attack, or both. I don't think we'll ever know.

Ok, you've now exceeded your previous levels of facepalm-induction from the previous paragraph.

The people behind Orca never told their ISP what they were doing, as it says in Ars. On election day, Orca got flooded with traffic. A denial of service attack is a flood of traffic. There is nothing particularly special that says "denial of service". Just lots and lots and lots of attempts to use the server. (There are DoS attacks such as ping flood that look more DoS-ey, but that wasn't the case here.)

We also know the Users of the system were having all kinds of issues signing to the site, getting credentials and all that... we know some credential were issued that should not. That is suggestive of hacking.

No, it's suggestive of a product that was not properly tested. Which is what everyone, including Ars, is claiming.

We also know two machines were taken off service in PA after they were recorded actually flipping the votes... CNN ran that tape, later on MSNBC. I am going to assume that this never really happen and it was the FX department at CNN...

Funny thing about touch screens. The sensor doesn't always line up. On some older designs, which they probably used because it's cheaper and more reliable, dirt causes problems so that a click appears in two places and it's up to the software to pick one or report an error.

Since I can't tear apart PA's machines and see what they did, I can't say if it was something innocuous like dirt.

But there's one thing I can say:
If you were stealing the election, WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU DISPLAY THAT ON THE SCREEN?!?!?!

You steal the election by displaying a vote for Obama and recording it as a vote for Romney. There is absolutely no reason in hardware or software that they would have to display the vote actually being switched.

To claim there was something nefarious here is claiming that the people stealing the election are geniuses and morons at the same time.

Just as much as you really cannot prove it did not happen.

Actually, it's very easy to prove it did not happen. 1) Orca didn't work the way they claimed in the letter. 2) Their description of the network layout makes utterly no sense. It's strung-together buzzwords.

Given that the people claiming to be master hackers can't get networking 101 right, why exactly should we elevate their claims?

Here is a hint, yes, I have actually talked with a few hackers over the years... they are good enough these days that they will leave code behind that will errase their presence.

That's nice. I am one. I am paid very nicely for my "hacking" - one doesn't have to be a black-hat to be good at it. This letter was written by script kiddies.

(It was part of a response, but damn it, here is a full fledge response... suffice it to say, I am not going to scream and insist that Anon saved the US from itself, but will not deny the possibility exists, like some folks are doing)

So, you want to shit on all the people who actually did bust their ass working for Obama's campaign so that you can have a rich fantasy life? Saying "Anon saved the day!!" means all their effort was for naught.

[grantcart]

29. lol, this should be good.

[UtahLib]

31. At the risk of sounding stupid, what are script kiddies?

Are you also saying that there was no possibility of attempted vote tampering during election night?

[randome]

35. 'Script kiddies' are, basically, amateurs.

Writing easy scripts instead of full-fledged programs using more complicated language skills.

[jeff47]

37. People who pretend to be "hackers", but just run tools they don't understand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Script_kiddie

Are you also saying that there was no possibility of attempted vote tampering during election night?

No, I'm saying the people making the claim under discussion here are lying.

[villager]

33. I think the rich fantasy life comes in imagining Rove wants free and fair elections.

And that the billionaires who bankroll him are willing to leave it entirely in the hands of voters.

[SidDithers]

34. I predict the Iggy list in your future...

Suffice it to say, I've seen the trends.

Sid

[pintobean]

36. Hacking expert

scratched from the resume. Nice job.

[Zorra]

38. "Because it would be beyond their skills to send an anonymous email with their evidence,"

Hmmm. Gee, why didn't someone else think of that?

Oh, wait....maybe they did.

[MineralMan]

39. Now, you just stop that.

How could you use logic? That's unfair. You've brought a gun to a fight restricted to sticks and clubs. You've brought actual knowledge to a battle of people who have almost none of it.

[Brickbat]

41. +

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Because we know Rove is an infallible genious.

Last edited Mon Nov 19, 2012, 01:50 PM - Edit history (3)

Bwwwahhhaaa. And this is a movie script!

Nah, I am assuming people are human with human fallibillities.

And you are telling me that we have had zero attempts to screw with the vote? I mean, CNN made that tape, out of the fx department it came.

Have a good day...I love it how we twist actual documented information in this pretension that we have the cleanest election system...ever.

Oh and I forgot.

So, you want to shit on all the people who actually did bust their ass working for Obama's campaign so that you can have a rich fantasy life? Saying "Anon saved the day!!" means all their effort was for naught.

Explain to me in your fantasy how exactly making sure the intent of the voter is followed invalidates the efforts of volunteers and voters. Isn't the intent of the voter what matters under US law? Perhaps you'd be cool with real hacking, we have evidence some if this was attempted, and a President Romney. That in my mind would have invalidated the efforts, but hey, partisans are a special breed.

Oh and my, should I be impressed? You are a white hat. You assumed I meant black hats? Not quite. But whatever, live in your rich fantasy world where none of this ever happens and we have clean as a whistle election and we can ignore any of this.

Of course, you are also assuming that I insisted, this till the cows come home that it happened. Apparently in coding school a thesaurus is neither wanted or required. Tell me, you just equated feasible, the word I used, with it happened. The words I did not use.

Oh and yes, access still sucks.

And I will continue to avoid it with a passion, it just sucks. And SQL my white hat friend, is a database. Very specifically it is known as structured query language, it is used in XML, and it is used to query the database created in ACCESS.

indeed

Indeed, let me add this little nugget from Microsoft, I think they might have a clue as to what Access is.

What is Access?Access is a database tool for gathering and understanding all your information—your phone numbers, inventory, guest lists, whatever you’re tracking—and providing a convenient way to enter, navigate, and report out your data.
Video: Get to know Access

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access/what-is-microsoft-access-database-software-and-applications-FX102473444.aspx

Yup, worthy many times in fact.

[jeff47]

53. Ah yes, when all else fails, change the subject.

And you are telling me that we have had zero attempts to screw with the vote?

You're discussing one particular supposed hack attempt. Whether or not someone has tried to screw with voting anywhere at any time is utterly irrelevant.

I love it how we twist actual documented information in this pretension that we have the cleanest election system...ever.

What documentation?

As has been pointed out to you by me and a ton of other people in this thread, THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION. There is a stream of technical terms strung together that do not make sense.

Let's try this example: "Casa grasa limpia Martes". Those are 4 perfectly valid Spanish words. That sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

These people have done the same thing with technical terms.

Explain to me in your fantasy how exactly making sure the intent of the voter is followed invalidates the efforts of volunteers and voters

Because according to you, the only reason Obama won was because of these doofuses "unhacking" the vote. No matter how hard the volunteers worked, it wouldn't matter because only the doofuses mattered.

Of course, you are also assuming that I insisted, this till the cows come home that it happened.

So you are taking the time to make and respond to multiple threads about something that you don't believe in?

Tell me, you just equated feasible, the word I used, with it happened. The words I did not use.

No, your failing is believing this crap is feasible.

Indeed, let me add this little nugget from Microsoft, I think they might have a clue as to what Access is.

What is Access?Access is a database tool for gathering and understanding all your information—your phone numbers, inventory, guest lists, whatever you’re tracking—and providing a convenient way to enter, navigate, and report out your data.

Access is a trivial database program. It is not designed for large-scale systems, so it is never used in large-scale systems, such as Orca. Microsoft is abandoning it for smaller versions of SQL Server. SQL Server is Microsoft's large-scale database application designed to compete with Oracle, MySQL and Postgres.

If any vendor ever proposes to use Access as your database, do not hire them. They are incompetent.

I'm beginning to wonder if you wrote the letter. You display a similar lack of knowledge as the authors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Have a magnificent day

you proved to me that you actually are quite ignorant already.

Access is not a database.

Snicker.

[jeff47]

58. You really should pick a side on your gotchas.

Or are you going to go back and change your earlier posts where you claim Access is a database?

(And just to save you some time, Access is a database, but can also connect to external databases using ODBC or OLEDB)

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. I said it was, and you said it wasn't

snicker.

Have an extremely good day.

[jeff47]

67. No wonder you think that letter has evidence. You apparently have trouble reading.

Please quote where I said Access was not a database.

Oh and this quote from you on the subject:

And SQL my white hat friend, is a database. Very specifically it is known as structured query language, it is used in XML,

Is about as wrong as possible.

SQL is Structured Query Language. It's a language for interacting with databases. It is not a database. SQL Server is a Microsoft database that uses SQL. Oracle, MySQL and Postgres are also databases that use SQL. SQL is how you get the database to do something useful.

XML is extensible markup language. It has absolutely nothing to do with SQL. SQL statements ("select * from names where last_name is Smith&quot look nothing like XML (DU will munge a sample since it has angle brackets).

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. Nope, you do

have a wonderful day.

and life, you managed to graduate.

[SidDithers]

71. And there it is! The Iggy list!...

Sid

[jeff47]

74. Oh noes! Now I will never reach the SQL is the same as XML plane of enlightenment!!!! (nt)

[SidDithers]

77. Note that I called it in post #34...

Sid

[phleshdef]

46. "No, their letter consists of technical terms strung together." THANK YOU!!!!!

God damn, this shit is killing me. I'm watching people who are otherwise reasonably intelligent people get caught up in this nonsense because they don't understand how ludicrous the supposed statement from Anon actually is. Its a friggin prank, put out there by someone with the intention of taking advantage of people that don't have basic technical understanding. People don't realize how ridiculous they are by buying into the notion that a poorly crafted GOTV scheme by the Romney campaign has no way of having any connection to any state's e-voting/voting tabulation systems. Its so absurd that its difficult to articulate why its absurd. This shit is driving me nuts.

[Ohio Joe]

50. +1

The stupid being spread to buy into this fantasy is amazing.

[reusrename]

90. I got this one.

WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU DISPLAY THAT ON THE SCREEN?!?!?!

It could have been intentional to create a false narrative to add to the confusion.

We know that kind of thing has worked well in the past. 2004 was full of this stuff.

And, it worked out exactly that way here, too.

[jeff47]

92. Your post demonstrates we desperately need to improve science education in this country. (nt)

[reusrename]

94. Can't you discuss anything like an adult?

All you have to bring to this discussion is another ad hominem insult?

That's really all you got?

Wtf?

[jeff47]

95. I'm discussing it on your other post, since that's the relevant place.

In fact, you replied over there. I wonder why you decided to hurl insults here instead of just going to where the discussion was taking place.....

[JoeyT]

28. Even if they did release evidence,

and it was the most damning evidence ever released, it would still be fruit of the poisonous tree.

I still think they should release the evidence: Not for the sake of prosecution, because that isn't really going to be an option. I want to see it released to embarrass Rove.

[MineralMan]

40. It doesn't matter. The failure to produce any sort of actual

evidence is telling. I don't know, but I'm a firm believer in believing what is backed up by evidence. I could produce an Anonymous video myself by 10 AM this morning. So could many thousands of others. I could write a description of how I thwarted Rove's plans that would be even more detailed than the one we have from this so-called Anonymous source. What I could not do would be to produce some evidence that I had done anything at all, because I didn't.

Claims are cheap.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. That I would not mind, assuming they did.

[phleshdef]

45. The supposed statement from Anon WREAKS OF TECHNICALLY ILLITERATE BULLSHIT.

I'll scream this over and over until people listen. Anyone with any credible amount of IT knowledge and knowledge of what ORCA is/was can read that statement and know pretty quickly that its a bunch of made up malarkey.

[RobertEarl]

49. What must be done

We must revamp the whole voting system so that groups like Anonymous can't get in and change votes.

As an IT person, phleshdef, you must be aware of how vulnerable the system is. What are your recommendations to protect it from roving anons?

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. Would you mind actually dealing with the real facts on the ground

1.- A denial of service attack did happen.... ComCast did shut down all inbound traffic. Granted, it could also have been really bad programing. Orca was not the best effort in this department ever.

2.- We did have issuance of credentials to people who should not have gotten then. Granted, some bad programing can cause that.

These two are not made up by the letter, they are all over geeky sites. They have been like reported and shit as facts.

We also have the tape of a machine, that may, depending on model, have or not an I\R port or wireless system... we really do not know if that was machine failure, as the PA officials said, or not. I'd like to have that machine looked at and over by forensics experts, but you think the private company that owns the code will want that? I don't... OH 2004, they kept their machines as far as they could from any like actual expert.

Those are the facts that actually match the letter. Yup, it could have been a few kids writing the letter after the fact, since well, shit, we all know EXACTLY who anon is, with any measure of certainty. And I would like to offer you beach front property in Arizona.

What I wrote in the OP, which some of you are even having issues with is... with current technology it is FEASIBLE. I did not say it did happen. There is a huge ocean of difference. Of course these shades of gray don't go well in a black and white world.

Of course, the mere idea that somebody might have wanted to screw with the election and a group of others decided to intervene and prevent it, sends some people into paroxysms here. For some reason this seems to invalidate their work over the last year or so. That I am still trying to understand how is this violating the word view of partisans, but hey, I probably should stop trying to understand partisans on both sides, for the record. It is a form of religious experience that escapes me, I admit.

I thought that we could discuss this as a possibility because you know what? The system has actual holes, and as an expert you should know that attacks happen regularly in the real world. Why wouldn't our elections be at risk too? In an ideal world I want those machines, AND CODE, to belong to WE THE PEOPLE and have the same level of security as DoD, NSA or any of the top tier government agencies. I also would prefer a uniform voting system nationwide and a few other reforms to allow for more people voting, but that is a whole different discussion. This sends people into paroxysms of fear and knee jerk reaction that we have the bestest system in the world and there are zero problems.

It almost reminds me of Republicans screaming, "We have the best medical system in the world." (Like 47, per WHO, but who's counting?). The first step in fixing problems is coming in from the cold and realizing that first, they exist, and second, they can be fixed. Some of the fixes already exist. I like what Bowen did in California, mostly decertifying all electronic machines. They kept some for handicapped people, and mostly paper ballots used with an optiscan. Yes, the central tabulator can still be fucked with, but you have the paper trail. So, if there is evidence of tampering. we can still count them.

[phleshdef]

56. I have 15 years experience in IT. But I don't need even that much to know a bunch of BS jargon.

Your "facts on the ground" don't back up anything regarding the supposed statement from Anon. There is no connection between a god damn GOTV database (ORCA) and state e-voting/tabulation systems. That part of the statement by itself is enough to completely annhilated any notion of credibility. Period. I know what the fuck I'm talking about.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. So the Denial of Service did not happen

and Ars Technica is full of it.

Got it.

Have a magnificent day

[jeff47]

61. Ars never claimed a DoS happened.

Ars said the ISP thought a DoS was happening, due to the sudden flood of traffic. The ISP was wrong, as it says in the Ars article.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. Oh it is you

The expert in Access as a non-database.

ok.

I am still snickering over that one.

(For the record I know what the article said)

[phleshdef]

66. Where did he say Access wasn't a database?

I don't see this said anywhere. I see where he said that "Access is a trivial database program. It is not designed for large-scale systems, so it is never used in large-scale systems".... which is 100% accurate in every single way. If Access were a text editing program, it would be Notepad whereas real Database Management Systems like SQL Server or Oracle or some other enterprise level RDBMS would be Microsoft Word or something equivalent in functionality.

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. You also managed to graduate

and read this person's FIRST POST.

have a magnificent life

[phleshdef]

73. Waving smilies are not helping your argument at all.

[SidDithers]

76. You've graduated to nadin's Iggy list...

welcome to the biggest, most diverse collection of posters at DU.



Sid

[phleshdef]

78. Geez, what an intellectual coward.

Him I mean, not you.

[SidDithers]

84. Her. But I absolutely agree with you...nt

Sid

[zappaman]

91. As a we now have 2 new members...with no doubt more on the way

I suggest we start looking for a bigger hall for our monthly poker tournament.
The IGGY list is growing by leaps and bounds!

[SidDithers]

75. This is from the poster's first post...

This statement is especially face-palm inducing. First, the relevant Microsoft product is SQL Server. Second, Access can't do what Ars describes. Third, how exactly does using Access MATCH what is in Ars?

Nowhere does the poster say, as you're claiming, that Access is not a database.

So, rather than admit your error, you add the ones questioning your statement to the dreaded Iggy list.

Wow.

Sid

[phleshdef]

62. So a 60 page voter strike list in a PDF format has FUCK ALL to do with e-voting/tabulation systems?

We may be talking about 2 different things. I don't know if there really was a DOS attack or not. Regardless, that has nothing to do with the alleged Anon statement which was a load of horse shit to anyone that knows anything about how this stuff works. Nothing you can say can get past that pure and simple fact. Stop embarassing us all with this bullshit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. I see, we are not interested in discussion

just in pretend online embarrassment?

You know, there are actual real experts working on things like this. It does happen, it is not a monster under the bed. Adults understand that in order to fix problems we first must admit they exist.

But I will not bother you with this any more. It is embarrassing (to you)

[phleshdef]

65. Its embarassing to the progressive community. It makes us look like technically illiterate fools.

And I pretty much am an expert, at least I have enough expertise to know that the Anon story is bullshit and that ORCA can not and did not in anyway have any connection whatsoever to anything remotely related to tabulation machines.

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. So it is embarrassing to discuss things in a mature manner?

Who knew?

Gotcha, so what other subjects should we hide under the bed and never bring up?

Have a magnificent day.

[phleshdef]

72. Its embarassing to entertain blatant ignorance as if it has merit and thats what you are doing.

I don't think it makes you a bad person. I just think you don't know any better. The problem is though, people such as myself and Jeff who do know better are trying to tell you why its nonsense and you are refusing to listen.

[Brickbat]

79. As usual, you see correction as a denial of the issue and a cause for condescension.

You're embarrassing yourself. Get a grip.

[MineralMan]

80. I'd comment on this nonsense, but the OP has me on Ignore, so there's no point.

Suffice it to say that it is nonsense, with no facts to support it. It's just speculation from someone without the IT knowledge to speculate.

[reusrename]

93. I would say that it's speculation with many separate facts in support of it.

I don't really understand why speculation about this particular subject rubs folks the wrong way.

Having had success with electronically flipping the primaries, they did not flip the general. Even modest curiosity would make a person wonder why not.