"Researchers expose flaws in California voting machines"

canada.com ^ | 01 August 2007 | Alex Blonski

[lifelong_republican]

"...the team was able to bypass security in every machine they tested..."

[x_plus_one]

The loss in confidence in the voting system will be the straw that breaks the camels back.

[onedoug]

So-called democrats will oppose any means - by any means - to insure election honesty.

[driftdiver]

“The tests repeatedly show vulnerabilities to hacking,
and the machines aren’t, in practice, kept in even
remotely secure conditions.”

If the machines aren’t kept in secure locations then paper ballots are not kept secure. Its a bigger problem then electronic voting.

With the access these folks had you could do anything to any system every built. Do you understand what it means that they were allowed to install firmware?

[Eagles Talon IV]

I suppose I am assuming that the original vote is valid and if not made by a legitimate registered voter then at least it is unaltered. If then a backup of that vote is made off site at one or more locations and the back up drives are disconnected at the end of voting then how can they be altered? Also since there has to be a direct connection to these voting computers to change the votes made, how can this be done without it being obvious to anyone watching the polling site? My understanding is the access codes are needed to even get into the system to make the changes. Why can’t the access code contain a fingerprint recognition program so that the only people able to gain access would be known and tracked?

[hedgetrimmer]

Another is for citizens to stop using absentee ballots. The chain of control is completely broken in that process.

[Calpernia]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1518679/posts
Vote Early, Vote Often

[Raycpa]

The new electronic machines should come with a scanner that creates an electronic date stamped copy of the ballots and these should be available for inspection on the internet along with the record of the machine recording.

[VeniVidiVici]

Well, paper ballots aren't secure either. A person can mark a paper ballot and place it in the box sitting on the table. Unbeknowenst to the voter, there are little dwarfs under the table with their own boxes. They simply move the boxes around to catch the votes and then use a sophisticated, chemical erasure system to erase the 'X's on the ballot and replace them with their own marks.

At the end of the day the dwarfs then activate their cloaking device and move the modified ballots to the original box. At that point they are then transported to the local county election headquarters to make sure their plan is successful.

I swear, I saw this with my own eyes.

[RSmithOpt]

Has anyone seen this in the US LSM (on TV or in the papers)? I haven't. I wonder why?

As many have said already, Photo ID's should be required at all polls across the nation. Plus, a paper trail and a paper record to verify the number of voters that came to that poll and the number of ballots turned in. Electronics are a good tech, but not secure. If we all knew the truth through all the years of voter fraud across the nation, we'd be sick.

[Eagles Talon IV]

Oh, bullsh*t!! There is NO WAY you could have seen anyone doing that. The special invisibility cream we use is fool proof and......oh shit...

[lifelong_republican]

You are so right! Americans will need to
fight the corrupt Democrats to restore
election integrity in the USA.

Don’t let the horror of HillBama reign by
rigging the electronic ‘voting’ systems.

[lifelong_republican]

The electronic ‘voting’ systems are unreliable,
hence the reference to MTBF, they’re vulnerable
to undetectable tampering from the time they’re
designed and built, they’re not securable, and
they rob Americans of their representation in
government. They’re unsuitable for use. The
support of electronic ‘voting’ is a campaign
for HillBama in ‘08.

[lifelong_republican]

The backup process can be corrupted as easily
and undetectably as the count process, and if
the count is faked, the backup will show a
fake count.

The electronics are known to lose, switch, and
fake votes as the voters use them.

Backing up bad data is not going to transform
it into good data.

[lifelong_republican]

You are absolutely right about the absentee process, hedgetrimmer. Our local Republican mailings asked
people to vote absentee, but that’s problematic.

[lifelong_republican]

Support for electronic ‘voting’ systems is
support for Democrats subverting elections.

[lifelong_republican]

Without sufficient audits, any electronic
system can be used to tamper with the counts
and do so undetectably.

[lifelong_republican]

Nobody’s claiming paper would be perfect, but
with video security almost as good as in a
typical convenience store, the chain of
custody could be observed throughout.

That’s simply not possible with the electronics
at all. They make it far easier to tamper with
the ballots and far more likely to get away with it.

Computer scientists have shown that despite the
known problems with paper ballots, they’re still
more reliable, more securable, and more difficult
to subvert secretly.

[lifelong_republican]

You’re so right, RSmithOpt.

If people only knew ...

[airborne]

On a side note -

There’s something to be said for the Iraqi election system of dippingyour finger in ink after voting.

You end up with purple fingers all across America, which may encourage more active participation in the system.

One of the biggest problem with American politics is, IMHO, apathy.

Just a random thought. 8^)