Electronic Voting vulnerability

Blackflag

Junior Member
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8246

Thought Desh might like this.

"In September 2006, Princeton researchers were able to hack Diebold’s AccuVote-TS machine, going so far as to write a computer virus that spread between other Diebold machines. Later, voting machines from Sequoia were also found to have similar vulnerabilities. “You can’t detect it,” explained Princeton Professor Andrew Appel.

In the same month, a team of untrained 54-year-old women from Black Box Voting, using 4 minutes’ worth of time and $12 in tools, were able to circumvent tamper-proof seals on a Diebold vote scanner, and were able to replace the device’s memory card."
 
simple solution:

Paper ballots (no punch cards, those are prone to jamming up)

plus, UN Election Monitors
 
Yeah I remember that study.

The GAO even said they were pieces of crap.

It only took 6 years to get people to realise they were hunks of shit.

At least most Americans realise it now.
 
Simple solution. Get rid of Diebold, they clearly are not safe enough to trust a vote to. Thankfully there are good machines out there, with paper trails included, that can be trusted.
 
Damo a recent study in Cali said that every brand they tested Sucked
They didn't test the Eagles that we used in the last election, nor the system that Bill Gates gave a stamp of approval to. There are good systems out there. It seems that some of the goal of the test was to attempt to show that there is none that are good, but they selectively chose ones that were the worst of the lot.
 
I still believe that the best systems are the optical scanners. Paper trail, easy to read, easy to understand, easy to count or recount if necessary.

I like those machines the best.
 
Ok but before I trust any of them I will have to see the test results of these a machines you speak of.
 
Ok but before I trust any of them I will have to see the test results of these a machines you speak of.
Not a problem. I believe that you did post a story about Bill Gate's approval of a machine that was denied certification in Florida. Just yesterday in fact.
 
I still believe that the best systems are the optical scanners. Paper trail, easy to read, easy to understand, easy to count or recount if necessary.

I like those machines the best.

Paper trails don't mean squat unless they are the OFFICIAL ballot of record.
 
I'm sold on the new/old idea of just paper ballots. Mark your choice, after presenting picture ID. Seems the easiest and most honest method.
 
I'm sold on the new/old idea of just paper ballots. Mark your choice, after presenting picture ID. Seems the easiest and most honest method.

I agree. Wasn't that what the people in Florida had trouble with? drawing a straight line to the candidate of their choice?
 
http://danbricklin.com/log/sampleballot.htm

take a look and then realise there was a large retiree population.

It is much harder to see even with glasses when you get old.

Actually when one increases the font, seems anyone with glasses should be able to read. Problem is some of the machines were not cleared out often enough, making the 'hanging chad' more likely. Then there were people that just couldn't vote correctly, voting for more than one.

Moreso the reason for just using an 'X' marks the choice. Valid or not.
 
Back
Top