Posted on 01/29/2008 5:04:00 AM PST by lifelong_republican
With the electronics, you won’t be able to catch the violators.
Democrats have actually violated state laws to deprive voters of physical ballots.
The easy solution is to just shoot any democrat over 40 or that has a child (if married). The younger ones may still be converted.
Where is the GAO report? I’ll take a look at it.
I read what you linked and those two articles did not support your conclusions, in fact, one said that there had been no security problems. Neither showed evidence of switched votes or fakes.
They can still count hands if the voice vote is indeterminate.
Actually, it’s possible to tamper with electronic ‘voting’ systems and leave no evidence.
The links I’ve provided don’t say what you claim.
The security problems have been noted, among computer security experts. The other problems are significant, too.
Here’s the GAO report:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07576t.pdf
Your recommendation would still be more reliable and secure than the electronics, certainly.
Very little is not the same as none. Very hard is not the same as impossible.
Just because you can not see does not mean you are blind. You just need to find the light switch.
or
“It is not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes.”
attributed to J.V. Stalin.
“Security, while important, happens to be one of those places where voting machines actually have not proven to fail,” Bederson says. “However,”
here it is again.
Thanks for the GAO link!
“democrats have actually violated state laws to deprive voters of physical ballots.”
how can democrats do anything wrong? if they do it for the children, they can never do anything wrong.
I’m not the best reader, though, could you please show me where it says that?
It does say that you must treat the system like any other technology:
In GAO’s view, the challenges faced in acquiring and operating electronic voting systems are not unlike those faced by any technology user—adoption and application of well-defined system standards; effective integration of the technology with the people who operate it and the processes that govern this operation; rigorous and disciplined performance of system security and testing activities; reliable measurement of system performance; and the analytical basis for making informed, economically justified decisions about voting system investment options. These challenges are complicated by other conditions such as the distribution of responsibilities among various organizations and funding opportunities and constraints. Given the diffused and decentralized allocation of voting system roles and responsibilities across all levels of government, addressing these challenges will require the combined efforts of all levels of government, under the leadership of the EAC. To assist the EAC in executing its leadership role, GAO has previously made recommendations to the commission aimed at better planning its ongoing and future activities relative to, for example, system standards and information sharing. While the EAC agreed with the recommendations, it stated that its ability to effectively execute its role is resource constrained.
“GAO Report on Electronic Voting Systems (September, 2005)
This report detailed flaws in voting system security, access, and hardware controls, weak security management practices by vendors, and identified multiple examples of failures in real elections.
Voting system vulnerabilities and problems found include:
Cast ballots, ballot definition files, and audit logs could be modified;
Supervisor functions were protected with weak or easily guessed passwords;
Systems had easily picked locks and power switches that were exposed and unprotected;
Local jurisdictions misconfigured their electronic voting systems, leading to election day problems;
Voting systems experienced operational failures during elections;
Vendors installed uncertified software;
Some electronic voting systems did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected;
It was possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works so that the votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate.”
http://www.md-eic.org/INFO1.HTM
See also:
http://www.md-eic.org/Documents/GAOReport_ElectionSecurity_102105.pdf
Ah, new stuff to read! Thanks. I’ll get to it when I’m off the road and have some time.
Looks like the 2007 report found much fewer problems than the 2005 report.
I guess things are getting worse! :)
The problems with electronic ‘voting’ systems are so many, and so significant, that they aren’t suitable for use.
OK, your opinion. Many of the problems noted for electronic voting are also true for other systems- most having to do with people not following procedure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.