Hackers were able to bypass security features on just about every model of voting machine the state of California uses and alter results.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Voting Machines Get Owned
- Thread starter Rich Tate
- Start date
Well no shit. Give a troupe of monkeys the SOURCE code, users manual and access to the machines themselves and you can hack into anything. This is in no way indicative of any real world hacking attempt that might happen to these things. It just gives libs another reason to try and "recount" or discount the voting results if they dont go their way. What a bunch of douchebags.
SEALTeamSix
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 2,434
You're right... we should TOTALLY just wait until the real elections and them let people have a crack at it then, without addressing any security concerns in the meantime.
QFT. How is this any different that giving people access to the paper ballots and saying "Ok, now lets see if they can change the results of the voting". This was a rediculous exercise meant only to deminish public confidence in electronic voting.
Why is electronic voting so freightening? We've all been trusting our money to machines in the form of ATMs for 20+ years, how is an electronic voting machine any different?
You're right... we should TOTALLY just wait until the real elections and them let people have a crack at it then, without addressing any security concerns in the meantime.
Hey ST6 what Im saying is that if they want to make them more secure do it the right way and actually get some usefull results from it. This exercise was simply meant to frighten the public and or give someone an excuse as to whay they didnt win. Remember the recounts?
The money in an ATM is not nearly as important as voting results, not even close.
Computers should not be handed the task of collecting and tallying votes.
Give a person access to 20 million paper ballots and see how far he gets in modifying them. Give a hacker access to a computer system and it doesn't matter if it's 20 votes or 20 million, they can all me modified quite quickly.
Computers should not be handed the task of collecting and tallying votes.
Give a person access to 20 million paper ballots and see how far he gets in modifying them. Give a hacker access to a computer system and it doesn't matter if it's 20 votes or 20 million, they can all me modified quite quickly.
That's a very simplistic view. What else do ATMs do? They give you a paper receipt, which can be used by individual voters to validate that their votes were counted. And I use the ATM example because while you may not be aware of it, banks have used internal auditing procedures for 20+ years to make sure that individual users or ATM maintenance personel are unable to alter the transactions. This is not new technology.
The only people who should be truely afraid of this are those who are used to being able to manipulate the existing paper systems to their favor. They in turn are using FUD to convince the general public that even though we trust our financial transactions, and in many cases our lives, to computers, that somehow we shouldn't be using them for something so basic as counting votes.
I personally don't find anything wrong with electronic voting.
We're technically not a democracy, but it's sad when two idiots outvote a genius. On average, computer users are probably smarter than your typical American.
Are you a damn left-wing liberal? That comment is completely irrelevant to this thread.
We're technically not a democracy, but it's sad when two idiots outvote a genius. On average, computer users are probably smarter than your typical American.
Are you a damn left-wing liberal? That comment is completely irrelevant to this thread.
Did you even listen to what he said? Btw if you don't know about this issue you should check out the documentary called American Blackout, then you will understand better I guess. Plus attacking me doesn't help your argument.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 58,603
One week ban for name calling.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,470
Glad they are testing for vulnerabilities, but I believe these machines need to be owned, operated, and maintained by the electoral college or another government body...not by private organizations.
Yes, why else would I have commented?
I never seen the documentary, and I dont want to see it. Its a conspiracy theory. I dont like being brainwashed. Im not into that kind of stuff. There is no evidence.
There are all kinds of bizarre conspiracy theories lurking about, and its rather sad when gullible people believe in it especially when theres a video with fancy effects involved.
It was never an attack. It was a question. It wasnt intended to help my argument in anyway.
Wouldn't be easier to just bypass the voting machines and have a familymember as governor in your favorite state?...no matter how fancy you make security on the machine, you got a guy at the front of it, and a guy at the back of it. can't get the guy at the front of it(the voter).just get the guy behind it.
You're right... we should TOTALLY just wait until the real elections and them let people have a crack at it then, without addressing any security concerns in the meantime.
hahah and hope all the hackers hate hillary so hillary will loose!! muahahhha
Sigh. Watch the security newbs pontificate.
Software security reviews that don't include analysis of the source code are worthless.
I'm amazed at how many computer literate folks blindly trust technology just becuase it is technology.
Ahhh. It doesn't matter anyway. American democracy is an illusion.
Software security reviews that don't include analysis of the source code are worthless.
I'm amazed at how many computer literate folks blindly trust technology just becuase it is technology.
Ahhh. It doesn't matter anyway. American democracy is an illusion.
Something as important as votes should have an extensive paper trail so they can be checked and checked again if the need arises.
What's wrong with using a scantron type card? It can be read by a scanner and quickly counted, but also leaves a nice paper trail to follow by hand later if necessary. Making the whole system digital is not needed. What are the advantages?
Since when is paper the definitive medium of record? We used stone tablets once and eventually got beyond those too. Just because something is on paper does not make it accurate, true, or unalterable.
The advantages of digital are accuracy, cost, and ease of use. All the same reasons we use computers for so many other things.
The advantages of digital are accuracy, cost, and ease of use. All the same reasons we use computers for so many other things.
So instead of a hanging chad we can have half-filled scantron bubbles?
Just make the damn electronic voting machine look like a slot machine. Everyone will be able to figure it out then.
I agree. Computers can crash. Paper can burn. Computers can be biased towards a candidate; punch card machines can be biased towards a candidate. Computer votes can be changed by hackers; punch card votes can be changed by burglars with a printer.
I have yet to understand how some people seem to get pleasure by constantly reminding themselves of the (false) fact that the country they live in is so corrupt and dystopian.