Posted on 07/17/2018 11:48:53 AM PDT by Mechanicos
Remote-access software and modems on election equipment 'is the worst decision for security short of leaving ballot boxes on a Moscow street corner.'
(Excerpt) Read more at motherboard.vice.com ...
My position is that if you're too stupid or incompetent to fill out a paper ballot, then you have no business voting.
Geebus... I am a software engineer FOR A LIVING and the FIRST thing I would have questioned is why that unnecesary hardware was on there, when it gives another point of access to the computer....
Duhh........
THIS is WHY you dont want the government deciding anythingm especially your health care. IT’S FULL OF IDIOTS WHO DONT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING
McCain Suspends Campaign, Shocks Republicans
by Liz Halloran, September 24, 2008, US News and World Report
"The sound of jaws hitting the floor reverberated in Washington this afternoon when Republican presidential nominee John McCain announced that he would suspend his campaign and asked that Friday's debate be postponed. Why? Because of the "historic crisis in our financial system," said McCain, who intends to return to Washington tomorrow to participate in Wall Street bailout negotiations on the Hill …
Hurry up and die, Juan. Your "use by date" expired years ago.
So, the only thing missing is a crooked 'client'. No way a leftist official would ever authorize an entry with ill intent? The answer here is to pull the plug.
Go back to paper and machine voting.
Let each county handle voting themselves.
I meant to add...PCAnywhere can be, well...anywhere! It doesn’t have to be the Mfg calling in.
Sure, McCain and Romney were shoo-ins.
It wasn’t Mc Stains’s fault entirely. He genuinely thought a Christian woman would be a real vote killer.
I believe this was surmised and then shown to be true a couple of years ago.
We have that in Florida. We also h ave a law that says that those paper copies may not be used in any recount. They put the safety net in place and take the applause for their wisdom then disable it legally.
So, we go back to the RATs in the back room of the union hall premarking hundreds of paper ballots, or prepunching stacks of butterfly ballot cards (Hanging and dimpled chads, remember?) or "finding" another box of votes in a car trunk once they learn how many they need, or losing boxes of votes from dependably conservative districts?
The machines in use in (our part of, at least) New Jersey are not connected to any internet or phone line. When the machine is turned on in the morning it prints out a "zero proof", showing the choices available and the votes for each, which should all be zero. At the close of voting it prints out the results. The total votes cast are matched up with the number of voters signed in by a voter authority slip for each.
The only way the machines could be "jiggered" would be in the warehouses in which they are stored between elections, each one individually. That would require a plethora of politically motivated or bribed technicians working full time in the off season. And SOMEONE would eventually expose it.
From 2002-2009 the largest vote machine vendor in the US was Diebold Election Systems aka Premier Election Systems. On September 3, 2009 ES&S acquired Premier Election Systems from Diebold.
Reminder the Help America Vote Act, a knee jerk piece of legislation passed due to the hanging chads in the 2000 elections, brought about computerized voting.
The kind of machine voting I mentioned is pretty secure.
I don’t see how the firmware, chips and software could possibly be contentiously audited to ensure that no one has introduced code to cheat.
It would not take that many lines of code to subtlety swing an election.
Tampering could be done at time of manufacture, during maintenance, transport, setup, updating. Or, in certain states, tampering would only need to be in a handful of precincts and that would swing statewide results.
Certainly cheating is also easy to do with paper ballots, or mechanical machines, but better, tighter human control of the voting and counting process could mitigate those cheating schemes, with electronic code, not so much.
I assume it was done on purpose.
After all, you can securely access your bank account from a machine. Happens 10s of millions of times each day.
Yet, we can’t seem to come up with a machine that allows non-tamperable secure voting.
Correct.
Now if they were sending down ‘fixes’ that messed with the voter counts, that would be the problem.
“to a small number of customers between 2000 and 2006,”
Which makes this a history lesson, not a news story.
Sold to states via middle-man Soros.
Obvious correction:
“...that it had “provided pcAnywhere remote connection software … to a large number of demoncrat customers between 2000 and 2012,...”
Ingenuity at its finest...Saves combing all the cemeteries looking for voters...
I don’t own a software company but I have a degree in Computer Science and worked in software for many years, and I completely concur with your opinion.
Pure electronic voting: Never, ever, ever.
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.