Pac-Man Hacked Onto a Touch-Screen Voting Machine Without Breaking 'Tamper-Evident' Seals

[BradBlog]

Pac-Man Hacked Onto a Touch-Screen Voting Machine Without Breaking 'Tamper-Evident' Seals
Same systems to be used by millions of voters this November...

This is your Sequoia touch-screen voting machine...



This is your Sequoia touch-screen voting machine with Pac-Man hacked onto it without breaking any of the "tamper-evident" seals supposedly meant to protect it from hackers...



Get it?...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7998

[RandomThoughts]

1. I think It would be a disaster if elections were stolen.

The last decade shows that pretty clear.

[Bitwit1234]

9. Folks - elections stolen---- republicans knew there is no way

they could get away with stealing the last election. The public was so in favor of getting rid of republicans. Why do you think they have the media pushing, the GOP is going to win...the GOP is going to win. Why are they obstructing and voting no on everything so bills don't get passed and the Democrats are made to look bad. That way when they steal the votes they think it will not be challenged. I think any Democrat who looses an election to a nut...Angle, Rank, Witman etc should challenge the election and go to war with it. I for one wouldn't let them get away with it. I would have the Marshall's come in and seize the machines before they had a change to re-program anything.

[Hekate]

14. Agree with everything but having the Marshalls seize the machines. It won't happen...

Local officials are not technologically savvy, and NEITHER ARE U.S. CONGRESSCRITTERS. They may use computers on their jobs -- in fact nearly everyone does by now -- but 99% of them have no idea what goes on inside the computer on their desk or in their work vehicle. The 1% who do work in the County or City IT Department and everyone else thinks they are geeks you can't have a beer with. They don't write election protocols.

The takeover of our election system was easy to accomplish because old technology that everyone could understand had not been maintained properly -- remember the Florida recount and the dimpled chads? Stupid easy stuff on a par with oiling your typewriter and cleaning out your 3-hole punch was not done, and not just in Florida. That, added to simple old-fashioned vote-suppression techniques (intimidation, throwing out ballots, fraudulent info about when and where to vote, insufficient voting machinery in big precincts, etc etc etc.) was enough to swing the 2000 and earlier elections -- but that part was not much publicized.

But computers -- those are magic! They are infallible! Nothing ever goes wrong with your computer! You can't cheat on those! --- What could possibly go wrong with this plan?

Well, we know what could and did go wrong with that plan, or at least some of us do. But most of our elected officials and the civil service people working on their behalf do not have the education to get this. I think they can be taught (after all, I'm not a techie by trade, but thanks to Early DU I was able to do my research, and thanks to my hubby being a systems analyst I was able to verify) -- but I also think that it will take a concerted effort and lots of money. In other words, not just citizen-activists but lobbyists on our behalf, that and getting people elected who do understand, and then keeping them in office despite Republican dirty tricks to smear and bring them down (as was already done with California's Sec of State during the Bush admin).

Calling the Marshalls will not work, and so far has not. All the poor guys can see is a black box.

Hekate

edited for typo

[Kalyke]

48. You have the Marshals seize them and receipt them to a

company that knows how to perform the forensics investigations to find the dirty tricks - an independent company.

[Grinchie]

51. Great idea, but to do that you need money...

I rememeber back in the day of the old 6502 processor, many software companies were using self modifying code to thwart hackers from figuring out how to crack their silly little copy protection schemes. Brilliant little snippets of code that would rewrite the program in memory..

Now, add that technique to Cryptography, off the shelf tools for Obfuscation, and I bet even the best forensic reverse engineer would have a hard time, especially since memory is cheap, and the important code is hidden in the middle of gigabytes of RAM or ROM filled with mostly garbage.

They can do anything they want, but the thing that stops all the games cold is the production of a receipt or audit trail the voter can take home with them. It used to be called a ballot, and is a physical entity. They have mass, and it takes muscle to transport them and keep them safe. The voting machines are useless illusions of vote gathering.

[Hekate]

62. You've got it cold, Grinchie.We had a local election settled by7 votes AFTER boxes of ballots showed

... up when a recount was demanded.

Actual paper ballots.

Hekate

[Jackpine Radical]

39. I think they did steal votes.

It just wasn't a big enough theft to secure them a majority.

[SpiralHawk]

43. You said it, BitWit

thank you

[defendandprotect]

55. Hartman says the Democrats don't want to discuss computer voting problems ....

because they fear if Democrats start to think that the elections aren't honest

they won't come out to vote!!

Taboo subject in Dem Party!!

[bonnieS]

65. It's taboo when it happens, too

They don't want to talk about it in any scenario. They'd rather just lose.

[defendandprotect]

70. It's insane . . . and only Rep. John Conyers has tackled this ....

makes no sense -- whatsoever!!

[defendandprotect]

54. Longer than that ... computers began coming in during mid-late-1960's ....

large ones used by MSM in mid-1960's -- which gave them new powers to predict

and call elections -- electoral college wins -- and presidential winner.

Prior to that they were only able to report actual vote tallies.


Voting computers began coming in during the late-1960's -- I'd question every

election back to Nixon/Humphrey -

and, coincidentally, just about that time we were passing The Voting Rights Act.



Interesting book on an investigtion by two journalists in late 1960's/early 1970's
You can read it here free --
but it's available here and there for $2-$3
http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

And, btw, they reported the results of their investigation to the National Democratic

Party head at the Watergate.

[KansDem]

2. Maybe it's a new way of voting...

Maybe you go after your candidate and munch him/her before getting caught by the evil ones?

wackakakakakakakakakakakakaka...

[johnaries]

3. Thank God DUer Fly by Night helped get them banned here

in TN.

speaking of Fly, if you haven't read his latest update, you should. It will break your heart:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8981174

[BradBlog]

44. Yes he did, but in TN "banned" doesn't equal banned :-(

Unfortunately, while the great Election Integrity folks in TN were able to get a paper ballots bill passed in the legislate and signed by the Governor, the Rs took over the Legislature in '08, on the state's touch-screens ( the only state to see substantive R gains in '08!) and have been fighting, successfully ever since to delay and/or kill that paper ballot bill!

As is, most voters in TN will use 100% unverifiable touch-screen voting machines once again in '10, despite the years old bill that was supposed to have killed them all together! :-(

[defendandprotect]

57. Wow .... and we should all keep in mind that these computers began to

come in just as America was passing The Voting Rights Act--!!

IMO, it's questionable whether there was ever a "Southern Strategy" or

whether it was all election steals thru computers???

Thanks for the info!!

[KakistocracyHater]

76. Every voter that has a cell phone should snap a pic of their voting results

or a vid of it.

[defendandprotect]

56. Aha . . . !! Didn't recognize the username, but do recognize the thread ....

re loss of his land for trying to help neighbors with medical marijuana!!

Wonder which had more to do with this attack on him --

marijuana or blocking computer voting throughout the state????

[Wilms]

4. White Hats with a sense of humor.

[Occulus]

8. Yeah. Part of me is going

"LOL WUT AWESOME" and part of me is shaking in silent horror.

If that doesn't wake people up, nothing can....

[slampoet]

12. Well Also installing the M.A.M.E. emulator program for the PACMAN ROM proves a technical point.....

....If the person who installed the Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator or MAME program can install this, it means they can easily set up a master shell program to run ANYTHING from classic arcade and 8-bit computer simulations (C64, TRS-80 etc.). But it also means that the shell program could run the election software but have a different ghost master program running at the core level every time you boot up. One that looks like the election software but with a string of math algorithms that change totals and erase records of those changes.


Which BTW - Is exactly what seems to have happened in an obvious way in South Carolina.

[glitch]

16. Very effective! I hope to see more of this. :) nt

[Cleita]

5. We've been busting these machines for their

hack ability for ten years now, and yet we haven't been able to get rid of them.

[defendandprotect]

58. Maybe it will take PAC Man appearing on the voting computers to wake everyone up????

[Cleita]

59. On Link TV this morning Greg Palast said that the

2008 election was tampered with as well, even though Obama did manage to win anyway. He said there are sophisticated plans to cheat in 2012. Why can't we stop this?

:shrug:

[femrap]

61. Because we are

a Corporately Controlled Fascist Society.

Paper ballots are cheap, no maintenance, and offer a record. Corporations aren't making $$$ off of that, are they?

[defendandprotect]

68. I've also heard that re 2008 ... evidently it was such a huge Obama landslide ....

or we might think of it as an anti-right wing GOP landslide --

that the Democrats actually would have had something like 24 more Congressional

Reps!! I tend to feel that's true --


As to why we can't stop them -- I'm with you in asking that so obvious question . . .

and here's a rather insane and disgusting answer that Hartmann mentioned in the

last weeks . . .

Hartmann said he has spoken with Dems on this issue and one told him that the

leadership doesn't want anyone discussing problems with computers because it might

give Democrats the idea that our elections aren't honest -- and Democrats would

stop coming out to vote!!!

Amazing stupidity or failure to launch? Hard to say!!

:)



And tho you didn't ask, imo, all of those involved in this landslide are not intending

to go backwards into right wing la, la, land -- either with Repugs or Dems --

GOP got where they are by targeting their own liberals/moderates -- and by targeting

Dem liberals/moderates -- and supporting, in turn, right wingers in their places.

This has been going on since at least VN -- GOP/NRA battles -- whatever.

Targeting and replacing!!

Notable Democrats have mentioned that as the next step -- but obviously I'm not going

to be voting for any rw Dems -- no one who is lame on women's rights or homosexual

rights or AA rights -- or anyone's human rights -- !!

Why would I???

[xchrom]

6. Lol! Fuckin awesome.

Now you assholes out there - do. Your. Jobs.
And ban those fuckin things.

[Freetradesucks]

7. That is disturbing to say the least.

Why can they not put the temper evident seals over the panel that can be removed by screws?? Seems like an easy solution, and one that should have been implemented in the first place.....

[BradBlog]

10. That doesn't work either...

You might not get it, Freetradesucks. EVERY attempt at security can be defeated by a dedicated hacker or a corrupt election insider.

And ultimately, whether an election is made secure or not, when voting on touch-screen systems there is absolutely no way for the citizenry to know that the election has been secure. That, in and of itself, is as much of a threat to democracy as anything else.

If you -- and every one of your fellow citizens can't see it, oversee it, review it, check it, confirm it 100% time and again -- then it can't, and shouldn't, be trusted. Period.

[Freetradesucks]

63. I think I would have to agree with you.

nt

[nashville_brook]

11. jeebus. here we go again! corporations have no place in the electoral system!!

[lpbk2713]

13. Election officials are certain their machines are secure.

Simply because the people who sell them the machines say they are.

I love how that works.



Seriously. They actually go in front of the media and say the machines are
foolproof because the mfgr says they are and that is all they have to go on.

I'd love to sell them a bridge in Brooklyn.

And I love it when hacker stories like this hit the media.

[Grinchie]

52. I actually attempted to design a Electronic Voting machine once...

Many many years ago.

As I put more though into it, it became evident that their was really no way to secure it 100% without the development cost becoming too prohibitive.

My final analysis demonstrated that a paper ballot is the simplest and most effective way to record someones choice. There is an audit trail, it requires no electricity, you can actually vote by mail without stepping outside of yur home, you don't need hardware or internet.

All you need is an empty warehouse to store all the ballots, and we have plenty of those all over the country.

Since when do we have to automate everything whether it makes sense or not? This whole think stinks of the Military Industrial Complex getting another fucking handout for the good ole boys.

[Poboy]

15. K&R to the F'n MOON!

Where are our 'representatives'?????


Damn it!

[razorman]

17. Does this mean I get to vote for Pac-Man next time?

[surrealAmerican]

20. Don't do it.

Inky has a far more progressive platform.

[boppers]

75. Yeah, but Inky's health care plan sucks... vote Clyde!

:evilgrin:

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. So next time I go vote I could try to break the world record?

:-)

On a serious note... this is not just a smidgen of a problem... but a very serious one.

But we all know elections could never, ever be stolen in the US... oh never.... do I need to repeat myself? NEVER, you hear me... so says Sequioia and the rest of the friendly corporations.

:sarcasm: for those who need it.

[WillyT]

19. K & R !!!

Fuck...

:mad:

:kick:

[RainDog]

21. TONS of people in my city voted paper ballots last election

because they became aware of the problems with touch-screen voting.

(I was one of those voting with a paper ballot, too.)

I will never vote by touch screen again, either. Anyone who does, if they can vote otherwise, is throwing his or her vote away.

The way to get rid of these, since the govt. won't deal with the problem, is by citizen action. Refuse to use touch screens. Vote by paper ballot. Tell people where you live about the problems with touch screens.

I would love to see the day when so few people use touch screens because no one accepts their validity that it makes the evening news.

[BeFree]

27. It isn't how you vote, or on what..

..it matters what counts the votes.

Paper ballots are counted by the same computer programs as DRE's.

The only step up is that the paper leaves a trail. A trail that might, or might not, be followed by the election officials.

As we saw in Fl 2000, the trails were not followed and bush, well, became....

Banks use an open source computerized money counting system. It isn't often that money is stolen from banks because the trail is open to every banker, who will follow every trail to the end.

Election officials are loathe to follow trails.

[RainDog]

53. providing a paper trail was a huge incentive

and, again, if voters refused to use touch screens because of their lack of faith in the political process as it now exists - in any other time in American history, this would be an issue that would be worthy of the news.

Because of the people who have worked to bring this issue to everyone's notice, Americans are more aware of the real possibility of voter fraud - and less convinced by things like those political staffers who tried to shut down counting the ballots in Dade County, for instance.

Thank you for your work keeping us informed!

[rucky]

22. Blinky is favored over Clyde by 30 points

and a strawberry.

[TalkingDog]

23. QUESTION DAMMIT. Is everybody sending this to their local and state election officials? n/t

[flamingdem]

34. Exactly... what can we do with this information???? nt

[jotsy]

24. Oregon is vote by mail, and it works for me.

ES&S works for the PTB, who don't seem to have any interest in letting the democratic process play out genuinely, so they manipulate every phrase of that process and dare us to stop them.

Welcome back from your holiday, Mr Brad! Where'd ya go, what did ya do, did you get to see all you wanted and what was the most fun.

I've missed you.

[slackmaster]

28. Yeppers, you just drop your ballot in the mail, and then...

Who knows what happens to it?

[jotsy]

29. I suppose I should clarify.

I receive my ballot and voter info early, have time to research stuff, fill out, sign and seal my ballot, and deliver it to a library on election day. There are folks that do mail in, I'm just not one of them.

I'd rather focus on remedy and contend receipts are what's in order. We get a cajillion little slips of paper over the space of a week or a month. They speak with great detail to what has been purchased for how much where and when. To suggest such a record can't be had for the rarer event of elections, isn't a well supported position.

[w4rma]

32. receipts are bad because it gives people a way to bribe you for a confirmed vote.

Or fire you for an un-confirmed vote. No, these DREs need to be banned, wholesale, from the election system. They represent a backdoor for any savvy hacker willing to spend the time to influence elections in their state.

[backscatter712]

36. Do what I do - take my mail-in-ballot directly to the county clerk's office

and drop it in the ballot box myself.

[BradBlog]

41. Vote-by-Mail is a terrible idea...

...Unless it's the only way you're allowed to use a paper ballot in your jurisdiction (and even then you should try to bring the paper ballot to your polling place or county headquarters if you're allowed to do so, on Election Day).

I realize folks in Oregon love their all-VBM system, but I still stand strongly behind the belief that it's a terrible idea for more than a few reasons. Here are just some of them: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6003

And with all that sais, Jotsy, thanks for the welcome back, but I'm still on the road and still not getting much vacating done :-(. Have been posting too regularly at The BRAD BLOG the whole time I've been out here (and via Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheBradBlog ), just haven't had enough time to get over here to DU to yell about it :-(

Now if I can figure out how to get some REAL time off the grid between here (MO) and home (CA) I hope to. Trend isn't looking encouraging though!

[jotsy]

49. I'll check those out, thanks.

And do try to find a moment that's for the fun of it.

[WillyT]

25. Kick !!!

:kick:

[IDemo]

26. Repub voters would think the choices were "Pac" or "Man"

[Kurovski]

30. K&R. (nt)

[Spheric]

31. I get the option of using a paper ballot at my polling place. Most people do here.

But, there are already many places in the country that don't give that option. Killing democracy through technology.

"1984" was not supposed to be a how-to manual.

[4lbs]

33. We don't use them anymore in CA thanks to our great Democratic SoS Debra Bowen.

She saw those things, saw that they didn't leave a paper trail, and many seniors, especially those with vision problems, had trouble using them.

So, she banned them. This was in 2007.

More on it:

http://www.alternet.org/story/59077/

[BradBlog]

42. CA, unfortunately, DOES still use them!

Bowen allowed the use of DREs made by Hart-Intercivic to continue unfettered, unfortunately (and insanely), which means two counties, Orange and San Mateo, still use them for all voters.

They are also used for disabilities voters in most of the rest of CA's 53 counties as well.

The good news, however, is that in CA *every* voter has the *right* to vote on paper (even in Orange and San Mateo). Trouble is not everyone knows about that right and the counties who use DREs don't go out of their way to let their voters know that! So I hope you'll help spread that word out there!

[theaocp]

35. I am Jack's complete lack of surprise n/t

[Taitertots]

37. How many touch screens need to get turned into arcade games on election day

To convince people that they are anything but secure?

I'm going to get "Pac/Man 2012" bumper stickers.

[carlyhippy]

38. that is pretty scary that this could be done..but..Blinky would get my vote anyway

C

[cleanhippie]

40. Electronic voting machines are not going away, so......

A new system needs to be put in place.

Touch screen machines need to have a paper receipt that is printed at the time of voting, then the voter takes that receipt and feeds it into a SEPARATE stand-alone machine that shows how the voter voted. If the voter agrees that the second machine is identical to the first, then the vote is valid and the process continues. AT the end of the day, the two systems can be checked for accuracy.

[BradBlog]

47. Like hell they aren't. Yet you want to DOUBLE their use???

Incredibly, you seem to like computer e-voting so much, you want to DOUBLE the number of computers we use?? Seriously? Have you been paying no attention whatsoever? Or do you have more direct interest in such systems?

In any case, the system you propose has been proposed by others, and fails to meet the minimal requirements of both transparency and verifiability.

I'll not take the time here to complete tear apart the suggestion you make above, other than to inform you (if you didn't know) that there is no way for anybody after such an election to KNOW that the results are actually what the voter intended. Only hand-marked paper ballots can accomplish that goal (and only hand-counting them at the precinct, before ballots move anywhere afford 100% transparency required for self-governance, short of anybody inventing an alternate system that offers the same or more transparency somehow -- as yet, I've not seen any such system invented, and the computer ideas simply have not and do not meet those criteria.)

[cleanhippie]

80. "I" do not want to do anything, so please do not put words in my mouth.

As I stated, I do not see them going away, and if that is the case, a system needs to be put in place to ensure they are accurate.

If my idea is bunk, so be it. There is no need to talk down to me like I am some kind of idiot, is there?


Big changes need to be made to the electoral process, I submitted an idea for what I think might work, thats all.

[AtLiberty]

45. Why are Venezuelan/Chavez ties evil except with this topic?

Whenever any Republican brings up the "evils" of Venezuela and Chavez, this needs to be tossed right back at them.

[Capitalocracy]

46. ALL YOUR VOTE ARE BELONG TO US

Creative activism, glad to see that. Hope it leads to something.

[AtLiberty]

50. K & R !!!

!!!

[DFW]

60. I said it on Bradblog and I'll say it here

My brother does high tech stuff for the Defense Department. He has long said (since 2004), "give me
a laptop and a cell phone, and I'll make any of those electronic voting machines give any result I want
them to."

I don't know why Democrats don't take him seriously (Howard Dean does, for all the good that does us now).

Republicans take him seriously. Indeed, they have been making those machines say what they want for years.

[customerserviceguy]

64. As I read the story

these were machines the "white hat" hackers had physical access to. Unless access to any sort of voting machine, device, or vote reader is ultra-tightly controlled, this sort of thing can happen.

I just don't understand why the people here who are so damned afraid of electronic voting systems are so completely trusting of every other type of system. They're all tamperable if those who run them don't safeguard them.

[BeFree]

66. Yeah, like banks

Do you have a clue about the OS banks use? Hint: Open________?

[customerserviceguy]

67. I also know that banks are a daily target of theives

who look to steal something that they find more valuable than elections.

[BeFree]

69. So

You don't have a clue? Need another hint?

Of course banks are a daily target. But the money is nothing compared to the power of government.

[customerserviceguy]

71. Maybe you need to take a different look at things

Thieves would much rather use their power to steal money from people rather than elections. I mean, if they stole an election, and put the Rethugs in power, we'd still be in Afghanistan and Iraq, there would be no universal equal marriage, and the banks would get big bailouts.

Oops, you see why I think that the efforts to steal elections are much less profitable than stealing money.

The same system that thwarts cyberthieves a billion times a day, that ordinary people use and trust, can be modified to do a reliable job a couple of times a year, if the machines are kept physically secure.

[BeFree]

73. Pfffttt

bush stole the 2000 election, and look what happened.

The senate was probably stolen in 2992, then the elections in 2004.

Then a bunch of people who are not like you, got together and made sure a lot of the DRE's were outlawed. So Dems won since then. You may not consider it to have much weight on this country, but you don't even know that the OS at banks is Open Source.

You just don't know what you are blabbing about. Educate yourself then get back to us, K?

[customerserviceguy]

78. Ok, I'll get back to you

Then I'll hop in a time machine and go back to 2992. Educate yourself on network security, like I have, and then maybe you can get back to me.

[BeFree]

82. Back to 2992? Try forward to 2992

You don't know which way is forward or back, do you?

Of course, were you honest, you would see the typo and not use it, especially like you just did, to embarrass yourself: back to 2992?

The point is that the banks use an open source code and that's why not much gets ripped off from the banks.

And the fact that our votes are counted with a proprietary source code, a code that is a secret to all but a few, is the cause for concern.

You even admit that we should use something similar the what the banks use, so if I were you, I'd just stick to that and quit embarrassing yourself.

[BradBlog]

74. You're incredible...

God knows what company you are the "CustomerServiceGuy" for, but I pity its customers.

That you don't understand the value of elections as far greater than money (since, to the "winner" goes a nearly unlimited supply of money, not to mention power) is remarkable. Or just plain disingenuous. I don't know which.

As to your repeated inaccurate statement about the feasibility of keeping e-voting systems secure (even from the ones who program them, incredibly enough, as you assert), I'll refer you back to my previous reply to you in this same thread, but will add one additional point. Where insiders in banking can similarly hijack the process, atleast that process includes transparency, redundant audit logs all around and actual audits on a very regular and professional basis. No such thing exists in a secret ballot election in this country, by its very nature.

So, unlike a bank transaction that I can go back and check a month later for accuracy, I can never do so in an election. Neither can anybody else. That's why ballots must be counted immediately and transparently in front of all before they are moved anywhere and the secure chain of custody can come into question.

That you'd compare ANY of this to a bank transaction suggests you are either very uneducated on this topic, or simply hope to mislead and/or disinform folks. In either case, I hope this reply and the one I gave you upthread is helpful to both you and those who may have been misinformed by your comments here.

[customerserviceguy]

77. Lobbyists don't need rigged machines to steal elections

And if they did, they'd steal them the old-fashioned ways that used to exist before any one of us could even buy a simple pocket calculator.

I simply cannot believe all the Luddites still out there. I look forward to the day when I can cast an Internet vote as easily as I book an airplane ticket or pay a bill.

[BradBlog]

83. You really DO hate democracy, don't you?

"I simply cannot believe all the Luddites still out there."

For the record, I made my living as a computer programmer for 10 years, but if you're unable to support your lame, I'll-informed argument with anything but absurd ad hominems, so be it. Fail.

"I look forward to the day when I can cast an Internet vote as easily as I book an airplane ticket or pay a bill."

That would be looking backwards, not forwards. Back to a day when the citizens of this country believed it was okay to have party insiders decide our elections for us, since Internet Voting is 100% unverifiable faith-based voting.

You and the other parties to the transaction can always track the validity of your plane ticket purchase or bank transaction. Not so with a SECRET ballot. But as I've explAined that to you over and again and you continue arguing in favor if privatized, unverifiable elections, I'll just have to assume that's what you want and thatnyou hate citizen-oversee able, transparent democracy (otherwise known as self-governance).

[customerserviceguy]

87. And you can't prove that a voting machine can't be rigged, either

Safeguards against tampering need to be employed no matter what the method of counting ballots is. If you don't have that, you have no transparent democracy.

[BradBlog]

72. You remain clueless about democracy, customerserviceguy

You sound suspiciously like a commenter who left very similar sentiments in comments at The BRAD BLOG, so I'll repost my reply (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7998#comment-427797) here for you:

BuckyONeil @ 12 said:

Listen, if you get physical access to the machine for some length of time, you can change it's behavior. The simple fact of the matter is that the voting machine needs to be treated with the same security as a box of paper ballots.

Right. But it cannot be. For one, every election officials has "physical access to the machine for some length of time" and can therefore "change it's behavior".

More disturbingly, however, election officials don't need physical access to ANY voting machine, since all they need to do is change values in either the central tabulating software or on the programming of the ballot memory cards before the election has even begun.

Finally, while a box of paper ballots can be 100% transparent (visible at every moment from open of polls to closing when ballots should be taken out in front of everyone and counted publicly), no voting machine (computer) can EVER offer that kind of complete, 100%, citizen-overseeable transparency. Ever. None.

If you fear an inside job, it's really no different than a Chicago-style election with the paper ballots being thrown away or altered.

Wrong. Entirely. If you learn anything about transparent hand-counting, you can learn how it is done 100% in full view of the public, making "Chicago-style election" gaming impossible, or as close to impossible as "impossibilities" can be.

I'm sorry you're unfamiliar with the facts behind this important issue and choose to knee-jerk instead of inform yourself.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Sounds like you would like us to do that, indeed. We won't. So, sorry. If you don't care for that you can, um, move along. See ya, Bucky!

[customerserviceguy]

79. Well, that wasn't me

But it's what you learn in computer networking classes, that physical security of a machine is just as important as software security methods. It's not the slightest bit surprising to me that someone else out there would use the same reasoning to point out the similarities and contrasts between old-style voting machines and electronic ones.

[BradBlog]

84. Clueless

No clue what you're talking about, but if you actually know anything about commuter/network security, you know well -- as I do, having been a programmer for 10 years -- that it's impossible to safeguard such a system from insider attack. If, however, you don't mind election insiders deciding the results of elections, rather than citizens, I appreciate why you'd keep arguing in favor of computerized, unverifiable voting.

Keep up the bad work, CustomerServiceGuy. It's only our democracy that you're willing to throw under the bus.

[customerserviceguy]

86. It's modernity that you're throwing under the bus

Someday, we'll look back on this with the same disdain that we have for segregated lunch counters, and wonder how people could believe things like that.

[lonestarnot]

81. Woohoo, my favorite game.

Not :mad:

[Poboy]

85. ttt

[Poboy]

88. k