Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

S.C. Sen. Phil Leventis wants voting machines impounded

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 10:45 AM
Original message
S.C. Sen. Phil Leventis wants voting machines impounded

S.C. Sen. Phil Leventis wants voting machines impounded
A state senator has asked that voting machines be impounded pending an investigation into a statewide Democratic primary where a political novice defeated a political veteran.


https://adw.thegreenvillenews.com/AdWebster/placead.jsp

Sen. Phil Leventis of Sumter asked the State Election Commission to impound voting machines until after an investigation is conducted. Chris Whitmire, a spokesman for the State Election Commission said no machines will be impounded.

Faulty cast-off electronic voting machines that South Carolina bought from Louisiana may account for what happened in Alvin Greenes victory, Vic Rawl alleged in his protest.

Whitmire, a spokesman for the State Election Commission, said all of the states machines were purchased new from a Nebraska firm in 2004. He said it is possible a handful of machines might have been purchased as replacements by some counties since then.

more:
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100615/NEWS/3...
Refresh | +14 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
dgibby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. This should have been done on day one of this debacle. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. This move, while well intended isn't likely to produce any evidence
of vote tampering. If there were fraudulent votes, the software that drove it will not be present
in the physical machine. If the machines are remote access capable,which they probably are, anything
could have happened via the access leaving no trace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. That's not really true.
If nobody touched the machines the software would still be loaded on there. But since this happened a week ago chances are somebody had access to them.

If this was done remotely traces would be left all over the place as I assume all traffic coming in and out of a voting machine would be logged (it would be absolutely insane not to log something that important).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Software that is designed to commit fraud is usually programmed
to erase it's own code after the damage is done.

For example: Code says "alter vote results to favor candidate (A) 59% of the time." The code
says "At 6:52 (depending on the polling place close time) erase "fraudProgam.exe".

Illegitimate logins can be rigged to either bypass the legitimate ports or modify the login prior to exit.

Only the clumsiest of programmers would have installed fraudulent software and simply left it on the
voting machine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Hard drives are kind of a bitch since the data is never really deleted
not to mention all the other traces something like that would leave. Yes, it would be difficult to find but not impossible. And when you are talking about rigging a national election I would think we have the resources to investigate something like that.

And again, any remote traffic would be logged I assume, if it isn't our country is fucked to the point where it can't be fixed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The most likely method is probably the remote login which could
have been built into the machine by the factory.

You are right about "deleted" programs not being deleted. However,there are ways around that also.
The code can be randomly merged into so other nonsense strings of characters,encrypted and then saved as a file, renamed someone inconspicuous and then deleted.

Further, the simplicity of the voter fraud problem would allow the entire code to be embedded in
all sorts of other files, i.e.logos, photographs and plain text.

Basically,the entire idea of trying to have valid elections using computers that are not guarded
at every step from manufacture, delivery, software is totally ludicrous. Those voting machines,if they must be used, need to be secured like the gold at Ft.Knox. Any less security than that is a bad joke. There are ways to make the process safe. No one in gvt/ is currently making any serious attempts to do that.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-16-10 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Remote login would be easily seen if they are tracking the traffic, which Im sure they are
any pocket that comes in and out would be logged.

Anything like this would leave traces somewhere that could be found given enough resources. I think this should be investigated and I think we need to stop using these machines. But I think what happened in SC could have been a voting machine glitch and not purposeful tampering. Since they won't launch a real investigation in to this and since there is no way to verify the results we might never actually know. And the fact that this is the case and we still use these machines is unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-16-10 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. We agree on one thing, junk the damn machines. Count the votes
. What's the hurry?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-10 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. I would have wanted a look at the Ballot Definition Programming.
But that's just me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC