Slashdot Mirror
Diebold Voting Systems Grossly Insecure
Several well-known security researchers have examined the code for Diebold's voting machines (which we last mentioned two weeks ago) and produced an extensive report (pdf). The NYT has a story on the report, which cuts to the bone: 'Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal.'
voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal.
Were they testing these in Florida a few years ago?
Trolling is a art,
till I ascend to the Governorship of Louisiana. Start reaching into your pockets, now folks -- Big Daddy's open for Bidness!
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
You would think, with all the qualified unemployed software engineers out there, they could at least hire a few...
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
You can't expect a secure voting machine! I mean, how else can [insert current party in power] rig the next election unless the machines are grossly insecure?
What, you were expecting fairness?
Subscribe for free to my show!
That explains why the L337 P4rt'/ swept the last elections....
It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal
Diebold Salesman: "This is a feature, an unintentional extra for your customers!"
I only mod up parents of "mod parent up" posts...
Cowboyneal for office!
Reporter: "Mr. Neal, under what platform are you running?"
CBN: "Redhat Linux 9"
Reporter: "..."
"Ask me about Loom"
It says in the article that this company makes ATMs. I think I'm going to go get some free money.
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
In practical terms, this means that elections will go from being controlled by corporations to being controlled by script kiddies. Cool! CowboyNeal for president in 2004!
"This is an iceberg that needs to be hacked at a good bit," Mr. Neumann said, "so this is a step forward."
Isn't that a rather poor choice of words when talking about program code? And is hacking an iceberg permissible under the DMCA?
-- Language is a virus from outer space.
Flaws? I thought they were features...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Now turn off your computer, sit there calmly and wait for the soldiers to cart you off as the enemy combatant that you obviously are.
If the system is insecure, why not have someone boost its ego?
Never mistake "can" for "should".
If recounts came about due to a close race, would they count dangling pointers?
In a democracy, we'd have to go to the expense of counting the actual votes. In our brave Republic, our leaders save our tax money by deciding in advance who will win and how many votes they'll get, so we can get back to our bread and circuses. God save the Ki- President!
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Okay so who's going to port the "Hot or Not" code to run on these Diebold voting machines.
::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
And this year's voting turnout is: 500%
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
I thought it was kinda strange for republicans to have all these easy landslide victories suddenly.
Interesting.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
if(bush)
bush++;
else
bush++;
2 1337 4 u!
See Here
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
I thought of a very interesting consequence of the DMCA recently that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else. The DMCA can actually be used against itself.
Okay, follow me here. It's no crime to create a word processor that looks exactly like Microsoft Word, as long as it has all things Microsoft removed from it. So let's just say that I hacked out the word Microsoft from the binary, and put in Cardshark instead, making it Cardshark Wordmaker.
Now I encrypt the binary, and add a decryptor at run-time to load it into memory. Now I start selling pirated versions of Word. The only way for Microsoft to prove that it's a pirated Word is by circumventing my copyright device.
Obviously this is example has holes in it, but consider a similar situation where only a small amount of code was stolen, rather than a whole application. How can legitimate software companies be sure no one is stealing their work, without running afoul of the DMCA? You would have to break the law to prove someone else was breaking the law.