Posted on 08/02/2007 3:45:59 AM PDT by lifelong_republican
"...the team was able to bypass security in every machine they tested..."
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
Schoolchildren could count them on video security as a part of learning civic duty.
Just another government “sink” full of money for a project where the drain stopper isn’t working properly!
For most govt. contractors, taxing entities have a pile of free money that is bigger than the private sector that they feel belongs to them.
That wouldn’t stop the Democrat from tossing in a box of fake ballots when nobody is looking, or voting twice (or more) or...
You are so right YouGoTexasGirl! You said it.
This has been a taxpayer robbery under threat
by racketeers. They’re forcing local officials
to use garbage computers sold for exhorbitant
prices with unaffordable maintenance only to
force unreliability, delays, and failures of
elections on the voters.
Voter Identification...Voter identification... Voter identification. One has to produce picture identification to buy a six-pack, to buy cigarettes, to drive a car but not to vote? It’s insane. All I have to do to vote is step up to a table and state an address. In return, the poll worker says a name, I nod my head and I’m handed a ballot. I’m waiting for the day to be told that I’ve already voted. ;-)
It’d be crude, clumsy, and detectable to load a ballot box the old way. With the electronics it’s easy and carries little risk of detection.
There are different types of computer security. Part of it is keeping unauthorized people from connecting a laptop to the voting machine. If they cannot connect a cable then they cannot hack.
Are we supposed to believe that paper ballots are free from voter fraud?
It’s a piece of cake to fake voter identifications
on electronic “rolls”, and even if the voters are
properly identified, their votes could be lost or
changed electronically with ease, too.
Studies have shown that for all their known faults, paper ballots are more securable and reliable than the electronics, which can be hacked in many ways including the installations of the firmware in the secret manufacturing sites in Communist China.
“Studies have shown that for all their known faults, paper ballots are more securable and reliable than the electronics, which can be hacked in many ways including the installations of the firmware in the secret manufacturing sites in Communist China.”
Studies paid for by those who oppose modernization of the voting system. Modernization to include actually using ID’s to verify the people are who they say they are.
Electronics are perfectly able to be secure. After all our entire banking system is run on computers. I believe thats the real fear. that the system will be made secure and the people who have helped dead people vote for years will be stopped.
Over my lifetime I’ve lived in and voted in three states. In both New York State and Virginia I voted using the old-fashioned voting machines where I pulled the levers behind a curtain. I would think it would be easy to jigger with those results too. In both cases I had to at least sign my name. When I moved to Massachusetts I was given a paper ballot that I had to mark with a pencil and then put through a scanner. After using the voting machines for years I felt like I was voting in a third world country. To make things worse, I didn’t have to sign my name to anything. I would think that it would be easy to screw with those results too but I do now understand the value of a paper record to back up what is reported on a machine.
The banking system uses paper trails as backups
and is audited.
There’s a big difference there.
Rhombus you make excellent points. Thank you.
The voting machines have lost, faked, and switched
votes in known instances and have the potential to
do so any time they’re used.
If they spit paper, it need not match the tallies.
They’re designed to conceal election subversion.
“The banking system uses paper trails as backups
and is audited.”
You honestly believe that the entire banking system uses paper backups? Here’s a hint, they don’t.
Auditing is easy. Not against auditing or adding security.
Funny how everyone thought electronic voting machines were the magic answer to the punch cards in 2000... and now here we are. ;-)
Fraudulent voters, illegal alien voters, etc. are not addressed, only the old "Diebold" excuse for losses, as usual.
Photo ID is not important, but claiming "disenfranchisement" and "electronic voting errors/cheating" is.
“Electronics are perfectly able to be secure.”
As an EE who has done a lot of design of secure computer systems and cryptographic systems, I don’t share your opinion.
Anything that doesn’t leave a paper audit trail is not acceptable, in my opinion.
Additionally, when systems like these are compromised, they are compromised in a big way and it’s difficult to detect.
Remember the recent ruckus over the breaking of the DVD copy protection scheme?
They spent millions of dollars to develop this protection scheme and all the “experts” said it was secure.
It was broken by a bunch of neophyte hackers with too much time on their hands.
JMHO!
Yes, return to paper ballots.
You’re right, Rhombus, a lot of people
got sold a bill of goods on them, but
the computer scientists never really
found ways to make them secure enough.
The horrors of HillBama will be brought in
with electronic election subversion.
It’s far easier to rig electronics than to
use any of the previously-known methods,
and far easier to get away with it.
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.