SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
It's much harder to introduce malicious code to something relatively simple like the software mentioned than most people realize.Ok, so I have more time and attention to show, once again, that @ttystikk, as usual, doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.
Ok, so the article points out that Diebold Elections installed PcAnywhere on computers used in the election process (not voting machines mind you, but ones that actually load the ballot choices so there is not that much difference). I maintain that this act does not create any additional risk to the election system. At no point in the article does it say that PcAnywhere is enabled in host mode as a matter of course - and, in fact, it is not. Tty, in his infinite ignorance, does not understand that the only way PcAnywhere could be used to affect the process would be to enable host mode. If a hacker could enable host mode on PcAnywhere, that hacker already has sufficient access to do whatever they want to the computer without using PcAnywhere! "Full stop". There would be no reason for them to use PcAnywhere whatsoever as it would be much more simple to introduce a myriad of other, more clandestine software to achieve their purposes.
The fact that Tty does not understand (because he does not take time out from his organizizing to actually vote) is that the typical "electronic voting" system (I am intimately familiar with most of them but not all of them) has a paper scroll printer attached to each one. Every single voter is instructed to check the paper printout, page by page, to ensure that their choice was recorded accurately. This printout is the backup hard copy that the local board of elections keeps in order to verify the vote. While the computer tallies the vote, the printout is the vote! If any recount is called or discrepancy found, this printout is the official record. There is no known software that can change ink on paper.
Now let's take the case of one of the election boards that uses paper ballots... Every one of them uses an electronic counter to count the tally from the actual ballots. Doing so is far quicker and more accurate than having local election judges doing it by hand - it has not been done that way in decades. When it was, elections were far less secure than they are now as local election boards were capable of stacking local election officials to just simply lie about the vote and count a paper ballot cast for one candidate as a vote for their preferred candidate. The use of electronic counters (aka computers) does not facilitate voter fraud, it guards against it. Now, when a poll that uses paper ballots closes, the ballots are sealed in a bag rather than being thumbed over by a half a dozen people. Whether the official record consists of a large pile of ballots or a neat scroll of inked paper that has been verified by every single voter is an invidious distinction that only the uninformed would make.
Do risks to the election process exist? Yes! They always have. Should we talk about it? Yes, and we do - constantly! Is there any risk to the system by Diebold installing PcAnywhere on PCs used in the election process? Not really. Was it a dumb move on Diebold's part? Probably, yes, mostly from a PR perspective as it makes them a target for sensationalized stories that appeal to dilettantes such as Tty.
But does any of this support Tty's running around, as usual, waving his hands in the air and screaming that the sky is falling? As usual, no. Tty likes to take little factoids that he does not understand, shape them into the worldview he has already settled on and then present them to us as his homework. In this case, he has invoked his bestest, most favorite conclusion the "America is a failing state" - as if every nation on earth is not grappling with the issue of how best to run an election and always has.
Tty, you are a poor student. I invite you to present me factual evidence to the contrary. Show me evidence of how the vote in America is at risk. Please feel free to use other countries as a benchmark.
You won't seriously answer this post - because you can't. You'll just fling insults like "divisive liberal" or "clown" or "ballwasher" because it is all you have. You are just a symptom of what is going on around us and you are being used as a useful, narcissistic, idiot by those who seek to destroy us in your quest for a system that best represents you rather than finding the best one possible given the current circumstances. You are a walking, talking, blathering, foaming example that the "perfect" is the enemy of the good.
Give anyone with any sort of skill access to the source code and it could be found in less than an hour.
I assume this software is verified by a 3rd party before use, right?
