I wasn't trying to imply throwing out secret ballots, just pointing out that ATM's are auditable and these machines are not. The "bit of paper" I was talking about is not kept by the voter but the candidates can use them to audit the machines without connecting individuals to "bits of paper".
The ATM analogy is a bad one since banks must connect an individual to a transaction. Voting machines must not connect an individual to a transaction while still ensuring one vote per person. It's not particularly hard to do, the issues have been well understood for at least a couple of centuries.
Having said that, diebold have shown they understand security and auditing issues by producing reliable ATM's, they have not done the same for voting machines. Given diebold's experience with ATM security issues it is hard to see how incompetence has played a part in this particular cock-up.
"For example, if you intercept an encrypted message, knowing the general encryption algorithm is infinitely useful in determining what the message says."
Things have progress somewhat since WW2 and the enigma machines, ever hear of public key encryption? You can examine the algorithim to any arbitrary level of detail but it won't help you to decrypt a message.
OTOH: I agree with the rest of your post, the most that can be said of diebold's "security through obscurity" is that it's an unknown quantity. Mind you there are enough visable holes in their procedures to render the source code debate moot.
Simply replace the flash card, you know the one without any kind of seal. The problem extends further than just the machines, it involves many aspects of the procedures including access to the machines before election day. What the GP is saying has been reported many times, I leave it to you to find the relevant links.
"These are the guys making ATMs, for goodness sake. A voting machine that is as secure as an ATM is probably good enough."
If the system were as secure as an ATM network I would have to agree. An ATM gives you a bit of paper to prove the transaction took place and are fully auditable by the bank, the voting machines in question do not give a receipt and do not leave an audit trail. The fact that diebold also makes ATM's indicates nothing less than malice in the design of such a piss poor security scheme for their voting machines.
"Security through obscurity" is diebold's methodology, by obtaining a set of original disks she has exposed a hole in their security and demonstrated the weakness in their methods. Diebold by their actions have basically admitted they belive their code is vunerable to "hackers", that "admission" alone should disqualify paperless voting machines.
In other words: If diebold can't manage to secure their source code from theft then how the fuck can they be trusted to secure your vote from theft.
...a sane election count relies on rabbidly biased people counting the votes in such a way as to maximize fairness. Most parents use the same technique on their kids to teach sharing, ie: one kid divides the cake, the other chooses first.
Unbiased people are not reliable enough for vote counting, they literally don't care about the "games" outcome so they are less inclined to question the prceedings and more inclined to systematic corruption via bribes, nepotisim, ect.
If you want someone to take you seriously, you need to provide more than rumors.
You don't need the source code to realise the machines and the procedures surrounding them are open to undetectable fraud and who can say if a copy of "secret code" is kosha anyway? Even if we assume fraud is happening, evidence like that should be saved for an indictment, but at the moment there is no court case where someone has to prove fraud. However that is all just a distraction, doubters should not have to prove fraud, they should only need to show it's possible.
In other words: You need proof to indict someone, you don't need it to judge the usefullness of these machines. A simple application of logic shows the design of "paperless elections" is at best hopelessly vunerable to cheating, and at worst a bloodless coup.
My there are alot of AC's in this thread, or is that just a few very devoted AC's?
"You are exceedingly naive if you think reality is the same thing as the rules. What if I, and a group of like-minded associates, run the polls in your precinct?"
Exactly how Saddam got 99% of the vote, however pulling off a military coup is a tad more complicated than giving a single "hacker" 2-3 minutes access to a single machine. If this really is sytematic fraud then they will only cheat where they have to, I mean why be so obvious as Saddam's 99% when you only need to beat the other guy by a few percent.
It no longer matters if you fly a liberal or conservative flag in government, flying the corporate flag and keeping the unwashed occupied with wedge issues is what gets one "elected" in the US or any other country that "matters" in the corporate scheme of things.
I know of no perfect system for imperfect beings, unrestrained capitalisim gave a helping hand to Hitler in return for a glorification of cheap labour. It is estimated that ultimately half the population spent some time in concentration camps. Rabbid capitialism should not now be allowed to overtake the planet by stealth, I say if "freedom" and "democracy" are trully important principles then do as "I'm a dinner jacket" suggests, democratise the UNSC./rant
Exit polls are considered so reliable they have been used by observers to detect fraud. Even if there is no fraud with diebold machines, it is still mind blowing incompetence on the part of election officials.
"What greater gift to pass on to future generations than a bunch of laws? Better than trying to raise 'em up with values."
Laws are codified values, personally I think we should all just relax a bit, get our collective nose out of everyone elses bussiness, demote "victimless" laws to values, and demote many of our values to personal taste. I belive George Carlin has found a way to cut the 10 commandments down to 2 (without using binary notation).
Alcoholics are like herion addicts, they care about little else except where the next "hit" will come from.
"I don't really know how someone can get to be so smashed and out of control that you don't want to serve them liquor and simultaneously they somehow don't break any other law except perhaps public intoxication."
Commonly known as a "happy drunk", they are an entirely different breed to the violent alcoholic. Here in Oz and I think also in UK, the law states you can't serve someone who is already "intoxicated", they don't have to be "out of control" just obviously pissed.
Someone who is totally pissed is not much trouble in the violence dept, it's the ones that are loud, aggressive and still standing that cause problems, they are certainly cognicent enough to remember they gave their prints and will think about their next drink!
You give children way too much credit in the intellectual department. Sure porn is unlikely harm them but over exposure to graphic violence can cause nightmares and worse in younger kids. Children (as opposed to teenagers) do not, and cannot, understand the "issues", most would be hard pressed to read a serious newspaper article out loud let alone have the ability to analyse the pro's and con's.
Nature has made humans rely on their parents for longer than any other species, kids are "designed" to soak up experience in judgement from their parents in a "monkey see, monkey do" fashion, not sit there struggling to comprehend the world by themselves. This fact is also the reason for "teenage rebellion", ie: kids are "designed" to start forming their own opinions sometime around puberty and soon discover mum & dad are not always "right".
Yep, my eldest kid had those really big pants for a while, in my day we dressed with style, ball crushers and platform shoes all round!
Interesting link, "double dutching" was something young girls played with two skipping ropes in the 60's, they would recite "songs" to the beat of the jumping. I suppose it was an early kind of areobics class or rap dancing.
Music is a powerfull force, it can speak to or across generations, my sig says it all (Re: Bob Marley for footnotes).
When it comes to what music I appreciate I'm an old fart who grew up with the beatles, stones, pink floyd, ect. The one Rap singer I like is Eminem, not so much for his music but for the messages and humour it contains, I also appreciate the fact that he introduced the magical talent of Dido to a wide audience.
"Overrated/underrated... compared to what? Communication, language, social skills have far more impact on civilization than math."
The function of maths is to communicate precise concepts, it is a formal language that is the same no matter what culture you come from. As with any other form of communication, using it does not require or bestow any "social skills", using it effectively is however a different ball game.
"Claiming that all "Real" musicians love having the music sampled is a bit overstated... particularly since the practice seems most common in Rap and Hip Hop."
Implying that "real musicians" are involved in Rap and Hip Hop is even more of an overstatement.
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't trying to imply throwing out secret ballots, just pointing out that ATM's are auditable and these machines are not. The "bit of paper" I was talking about is not kept by the voter but the candidates can use them to audit the machines without connecting individuals to "bits of paper".
The ATM analogy is a bad one since banks must connect an individual to a transaction. Voting machines must not connect an individual to a transaction while still ensuring one vote per person. It's not particularly hard to do, the issues have been well understood for at least a couple of centuries.
Having said that, diebold have shown they understand security and auditing issues by producing reliable ATM's, they have not done the same for voting machines. Given diebold's experience with ATM security issues it is hard to see how incompetence has played a part in this particular cock-up.
"For example, if you intercept an encrypted message, knowing the general encryption algorithm is infinitely useful in determining what the message says."
Things have progress somewhat since WW2 and the enigma machines, ever hear of public key encryption? You can examine the algorithim to any arbitrary level of detail but it won't help you to decrypt a message.
OTOH: I agree with the rest of your post, the most that can be said of diebold's "security through obscurity" is that it's an unknown quantity. Mind you there are enough visable holes in their procedures to render the source code debate moot.
Simply replace the flash card, you know the one without any kind of seal. The problem extends further than just the machines, it involves many aspects of the procedures including access to the machines before election day. What the GP is saying has been reported many times, I leave it to you to find the relevant links.
"These are the guys making ATMs, for goodness sake. A voting machine that is as secure as an ATM is probably good enough."
If the system were as secure as an ATM network I would have to agree. An ATM gives you a bit of paper to prove the transaction took place and are fully auditable by the bank, the voting machines in question do not give a receipt and do not leave an audit trail. The fact that diebold also makes ATM's indicates nothing less than malice in the design of such a piss poor security scheme for their voting machines.
"Security through obscurity" is diebold's methodology, by obtaining a set of original disks she has exposed a hole in their security and demonstrated the weakness in their methods. Diebold by their actions have basically admitted they belive their code is vunerable to "hackers", that "admission" alone should disqualify paperless voting machines.
In other words: If diebold can't manage to secure their source code from theft then how the fuck can they be trusted to secure your vote from theft.
You know nothing about me and have just done to me what you accuse me of doing to heroin addicts, welcome to the monkeyshpere my friend.
Good point, I'm an Aussie, we use the word "pissed" to mean drunk or angry depending on the context, in this case I meant drunk.
...a sane election count relies on rabbidly biased people counting the votes in such a way as to maximize fairness. Most parents use the same technique on their kids to teach sharing, ie: one kid divides the cake, the other chooses first.
Unbiased people are not reliable enough for vote counting, they literally don't care about the "games" outcome so they are less inclined to question the prceedings and more inclined to systematic corruption via bribes, nepotisim, ect.
If you want someone to take you seriously, you need to provide more than rumors.
You don't need the source code to realise the machines and the procedures surrounding them are open to undetectable fraud and who can say if a copy of "secret code" is kosha anyway? Even if we assume fraud is happening, evidence like that should be saved for an indictment, but at the moment there is no court case where someone has to prove fraud. However that is all just a distraction, doubters should not have to prove fraud, they should only need to show it's possible.
In other words: You need proof to indict someone, you don't need it to judge the usefullness of these machines. A simple application of logic shows the design of "paperless elections" is at best hopelessly vunerable to cheating, and at worst a bloodless coup.
My there are alot of AC's in this thread, or is that just a few very devoted AC's?
"You are exceedingly naive if you think reality is the same thing as the rules. What if I, and a group of like-minded associates, run the polls in your precinct?"
/rant
Exactly how Saddam got 99% of the vote, however pulling off a military coup is a tad more complicated than giving a single "hacker" 2-3 minutes access to a single machine. If this really is sytematic fraud then they will only cheat where they have to, I mean why be so obvious as Saddam's 99% when you only need to beat the other guy by a few percent.
It no longer matters if you fly a liberal or conservative flag in government, flying the corporate flag and keeping the unwashed occupied with wedge issues is what gets one "elected" in the US or any other country that "matters" in the corporate scheme of things.
I know of no perfect system for imperfect beings, unrestrained capitalisim gave a helping hand to Hitler in return for a glorification of cheap labour. It is estimated that ultimately half the population spent some time in concentration camps. Rabbid capitialism should not now be allowed to overtake the planet by stealth, I say if "freedom" and "democracy" are trully important principles then do as "I'm a dinner jacket" suggests, democratise the UNSC.
Exit polls are considered so reliable they have been used by observers to detect fraud. Even if there is no fraud with diebold machines, it is still mind blowing incompetence on the part of election officials.
"So how is this any different from a traditional low tech ballot box?"
Low tech is a wax seal and independent observers, nobody has yet come up with a "paper virus" that can switch the vote after you have made it.
"What greater gift to pass on to future generations than a bunch of laws? Better than trying to raise 'em up with values."
Laws are codified values, personally I think we should all just relax a bit, get our collective nose out of everyone elses bussiness, demote "victimless" laws to values, and demote many of our values to personal taste. I belive George Carlin has found a way to cut the 10 commandments down to 2 (without using binary notation).
Alcoholics are like herion addicts, they care about little else except where the next "hit" will come from.
"I don't really know how someone can get to be so smashed and out of control that you don't want to serve them liquor and simultaneously they somehow don't break any other law except perhaps public intoxication."
Commonly known as a "happy drunk", they are an entirely different breed to the violent alcoholic. Here in Oz and I think also in UK, the law states you can't serve someone who is already "intoxicated", they don't have to be "out of control" just obviously pissed.
Someone who is totally pissed is not much trouble in the violence dept, it's the ones that are loud, aggressive and still standing that cause problems, they are certainly cognicent enough to remember they gave their prints and will think about their next drink!
"the wildest nymphomaniac I have ever met, smarter than hell and an appitite for sex that was mind blowing."
Hmmm, maybe I should rethink my stance, the wildest nympho I ever met was as dumb as dogshit.
The smartest nympho I ever met made her own whips from bungie cord and sold them to sex shops.
A white rap champion and a blck golf champion, go-figure huh? /joke
You give children way too much credit in the intellectual department. Sure porn is unlikely harm them but over exposure to graphic violence can cause nightmares and worse in younger kids. Children (as opposed to teenagers) do not, and cannot, understand the "issues", most would be hard pressed to read a serious newspaper article out loud let alone have the ability to analyse the pro's and con's.
Nature has made humans rely on their parents for longer than any other species, kids are "designed" to soak up experience in judgement from their parents in a "monkey see, monkey do" fashion, not sit there struggling to comprehend the world by themselves. This fact is also the reason for "teenage rebellion", ie: kids are "designed" to start forming their own opinions sometime around puberty and soon discover mum & dad are not always "right".
everybody with a clue understands that "hate speech" is newspeak for "disagrees with liberal orthodoxy"
:)
I hate you for saying that!
Yep, my eldest kid had those really big pants for a while, in my day we dressed with style, ball crushers and platform shoes all round!
Interesting link, "double dutching" was something young girls played with two skipping ropes in the 60's, they would recite "songs" to the beat of the jumping. I suppose it was an early kind of areobics class or rap dancing.
Music is a powerfull force, it can speak to or across generations, my sig says it all (Re: Bob Marley for footnotes).
"you sir are an asshole"
Maybe, but you sir can't take a joke!
When it comes to what music I appreciate I'm an old fart who grew up with the beatles, stones, pink floyd, ect. The one Rap singer I like is Eminem, not so much for his music but for the messages and humour it contains, I also appreciate the fact that he introduced the magical talent of Dido to a wide audience.
When someone describes their skills with "I'm a people person", I automatically deduce their only skill is bullshiting.
Maybe, but your communication skills suck.
"Overrated/underrated... compared to what? Communication, language, social skills have far more impact on civilization than math."
The function of maths is to communicate precise concepts, it is a formal language that is the same no matter what culture you come from. As with any other form of communication, using it does not require or bestow any "social skills", using it effectively is however a different ball game.
"If you want to mingle with people with high IQs, then try Menza."
It's "Mensa", and smart people don't pay Mensa to tell them they are smart.
"Claiming that all "Real" musicians love having the music sampled is a bit overstated ... particularly since the practice seems most common in Rap and Hip Hop."
Implying that "real musicians" are involved in Rap and Hip Hop is even more of an overstatement.