Posted on 09/26/2006 12:01:39 PM PDT by kenn5
DENVER, Sept. 22 -- A judge on Friday chastised state officials for botching efforts to ensure that electronic voting machines are tamper-proof, but he cleared them for use in the November election, saying it is too late now to change course.
Denver County District Judge Lawrence A. Manzanares said the secretary of state's office had violated state law by failing to come up with minimum security standards for the machines. He added that the office had done an "abysmal" job documenting which tests were performed on the machines and should not have allowed computer manufacturers to vouch for the security of their own products.
The judge said, however, that he would not bar the machines with the election just six weeks away and county clerks warning that they might not have time to print enough paper ballots.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The dims learned their lesson is 2000--won't make the same mistakes with hanging chads this time around!
Electronic voting machines will put the fox in the henhouse.
.
I am afraid of Nov 2008 elections with voting machines. Too many dangers of HACKERS. My kids knew how to hack any system by age 14. No they don't do it, but anyone can HACK the voting machines.
Tired of all this DU-paranoiac Luddite garbage.
The truth is that even though there are some POSSIBLE flaws with electronic voting, is is much more secure against vote fraud by paper ballot. That is why you have all these liberal groups wanting to go back to paper ballots so the democrats can stuff the ballot box and rob you of your voting rights like they did in the old days.
See my post #6.
"You can falsify paper ballots more easily than you can fasify electronic ones."
Nope.
Should he call off the election until then?
You can steal paper ballots and replace them with other pieces of paper. As long as you can do it in secrecy, no one will be the wiser.
A computer harddrive with a randomly generated digital identity matched with a serial number cannot be easily replaced on a moment's notice. And they are extremely difficult to erase - the only way to hide the evidence is to destroy the original and replace it with an identical physical copy that also has a matching randomly generated difital signature - extremly difficult to do on the fly during a contested election.
Fox News Channel showed a PERFECT demonstration of how the fraud worked.
PREFECT.
They did a fictional ract between George Washington and Benedict Arnold.
They did THREE votes for washington and ZERO votes for Benedict Arnold.
The virus infected machine said the vote tally was ONE vote for Washington and TWO votes for Benedict Arnold.
It was a Dibold touch screen machine. It was the same type and style used throughout the nation.
A recount would recount to the fraud result.
All you need to do with paper ballots is mark an identical number up the "right" way, and shred the real ones. Easy as pie.
With electronic voting, you need to be able to physically replace an encoded hard drive using an identical algorithm that was randomly generated - something that is not only difficult to do, but highly impractical.
You steal an election by magically finding a few extra paper ballots in a closet. You can't magically find a new hard drive that identically matches an existing one and switch it out on the fly.
It's much easier to falsify paper ballots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JESZiLpBLE
This is the YouTube clip of the Fox News clip where
THEY ACTUALLY REAL TIME DEMONSTRATED THE FRAUD.
This is like the time rush ran the wire through the puch cards.
The is serious! (not to be confused with ceral for those in rio linda)
I know that there is not a completely secured voting system. However, it seems like mass fraud can be perpetrated with these electronic voting machines. At least there is a paper trail with paper ballots.
ok I will give you that.
HOWEVER,
With the electronic you only need ONE person in the chain to achieve the fraud.
With paper you need help.
ONE persone infects the virus and the virus self deletes leaving only the fruad as the only record.
The machines are not as flawed as the ones who are voting!
Ok, from that video, it was not clear how the virus was transferred to the voting machine. Regardless of what technology is used, albeit paper, mechanical, or computer, the need for physical security cannot be overstated. In any situation, I can see the ability of a single individual being able to pull this off.
I wonder what the base OS is on these machines? I hope it is not M$ based...hehehe Maybe the manufacturer can incorporate some checksum calculations or some other means to ensure the machines have not been tampered with.
Correct, but there are always telltale traces on the hard drive which are susceptible to forensic analysis.
Many, many child porn offenders are in prison because they thought they had used state-of-the-art overwriting software to wipe their hard drives, but federal hardware experts were able to reconstruct images that had been wiped in binary several hundred times.
And you cannot wipe a defrauded election machine drive even once, because you will erase the fake votes along with the virus. You basically have to hope that no one suspects anything fishy, because once there's an investigation, you're toast.
It's even easier to find the culprit because, as you say, a single person can pull this off and the chain of custody is a matter of record.
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.