[ale] OT: Voting machines cracked in California

[Jeff Lightner]

Not having source didn't prevent folks from reverse engineering the IBM
BIOS in the original IBM PC which was the only IBM unique part it had.

 

The idea one has to have source to hack is laughable indeed.  Even more
laughable is the idea that it would be difficult to get the source if
you were determined to get it.

 

This reminds me of the old Lou Grant show where they did a story about
nuclear weapons.   The folks that had access to the weapons design
information said it was easy to get but thought it was hard to get the
fissionable material.   The people who were custodian of fissionable
material said it would be easy to get but thought it was to get the
design information.   Essentially the guys guarding each side both said
their side was fairly easy to compromise but weren't worried because
they "assumed" the other side was hard to compromise.

 

One might stuff ballot boxes or deliberately miscount paper ballots but
there would still be a way to verify the results after the fact using
completely different counters.   If you don't believe that, you'd have
to explain why Republicans and Democrats alike thought it necessary to
be present at the recounts in Florida.

 

________________________________

From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of
To: ale at ale.org
Steve Brown
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:21 PM
To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
Subject: Re: [ale] OT: Voting machines cracked in California

 

 

On 8/2/07, Charles Shapiro <hooterpincher at gmail.com> wrote:

  The guys who wrote this report had a bunch of advantages -- among them
were access to the source code and unlimited time to investigate the
physical machines.  I'm not tryin' to discount the severity of the flaws
they found, which were pretty way badd.  But there are two other reports
from two other teams which have yet to be published. Felten suspects
that these reports are even more damning.


The thing is, these people seem to be assuming that since the source
code is not publicly released that no one has access to it. What about
the programmers that worked on the project? What about the people with
the access keys? They are just as capable of compromising the system and
they would have easier access to the system than any voter. I bet that
Steve Weir guy buries his money in his back yard to keep it safe. Open
Source is like giving a burglar your house keys? Give me a break... This
thing should have been built from the ground up with security in mind,
instead of slapped on as an afterthought. Was this one of those things
that gets sent to the lowest bidder? 
-Steve Brown

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...