Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ramius

Oh, and...

One of the ongoing complaints from the left is that Diebold refused to release the listing of its software. Which, if you think about it, is exactly what a hacker would need in order to reprogram the machine. So, by demanding the software be public, they're increasing the vulnerabilities of the system, which they can then complain about.

Same ole' left, always wants it both ways.


27 posted on 05/10/2006 10:51:03 AM PDT by ArmstedFragg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: ArmstedFragg
One of the ongoing complaints from the left is that Diebold refused to release the listing of its software.

There is no other way to confirm its security.

39 posted on 05/12/2006 6:33:52 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: ArmstedFragg
One of the ongoing complaints from the left is that Diebold refused to release the listing of its software.

As I said earlier, North Carolina wanted to audit their software, but Diebold didn't let them, and got certified anyway.

Which, if you think about it, is exactly what a hacker would need in order to reprogram the machine.

How do hackers manage to break into Windows servers so often?

42 posted on 05/12/2006 12:23:15 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson