What is Digg?110 Comments
- gamercubed, on 12/17/2007, -0/+53This is ridiculous. Private web commerce sites like amazon.com have far more secure and robust software for keeping track of our measly DVD purchases than our government has for keeping track of our votes for the next President of the US.
Here's an idea: Print each vote as it's cast and feed the roll of paper so the vote (and only that vote) appears in a little window so the voter can confirm that it matches the button they pushed. Then, have the election officials randomly compare the paper record with the electronic record for that machine. That way you have a paper trail that's confirmed by the individual voters as they vote.
Oh, and make sure all IO devices besides the screen are truly inaccessible! Duh! - JlmAWP, on 12/17/2007, -8/+51Ron Paul doesn't need to win like that.
- nakile, on 12/17/2007, -2/+41Why do they keep calling it a virus?
- Ghostalker, on 12/17/2007, -1/+39This is a hell of a lot easier then stuffing ballot boxes, or throwing away votes.
- dgh1973, on 12/17/2007, -0/+35When I voted in the 2004 election I was pretty pissed to find out my local voting machines appeared to be on an open wi-fi network. It's no wonder the last two elections have seemed "suspicious".
- j.carcinogen, on 12/17/2007, -2/+25I wrote an article on this with some decent links if you want to see exactly how to hack them and the different methods. NO ADS: http://scottdangel.com/blog/?p=12
- SiNN4R, on 12/17/2007, -1/+22Because this kind of voter fraud is easier to get away with and far more effective.
- Durinthal, on 12/17/2007, -1/+20The issue with electronic ballots that, as far as I'm aware, can't happen with other types is that a single person can change hundreds or thousands of votes nearly instantly.
- ClockworksNine, on 12/17/2007, -5/+23I have serious doubt the P-man would even accept the position if he won it in that way.
- ohanon, on 12/17/2007, -1/+16So if Ron Paul wins, all diggers need to hide.
- trogdoor, on 12/17/2007, -0/+14Because, while they only mentioned it in passing, it can replicate itself.
- Micktion, on 12/17/2007, -2/+15Ha. Ha.
I don't think this is very funny. If you really think this is just some comical sort of accidental oversight, you're quite naive. This is obviously a feature of the system and not a bug or a flaw. The people who designed these machines to be "hackable", as well as the people who actually "hacked" them had absolutely no regard for anyone's civil liberties, other than to deliberately and methodically take them away.
This is how then neo-con(victs) stole a second term in office for Georgey Bush, to allow them to finish the job of bankrupting the US in the process of making themselves obscenely rich. - Culat, on 12/17/2007, -0/+13I work the polls every election, and that's how it was for us. There's also a seal that covers the door pictured and if you remove it says VOID over and over (at the beginning and end of the election the precinct supervisor and assistant supervisor verify that they haven't been tampered with, you can see the last paper that printed out in that video... That's the paper we're required to post on our door at the end. We also keep a copy that we turn in). Everything that gets done to the machine gets logged. There are tamper-evident seals that are placed everywhere. Poll workers are always in need, you should try working some time, you get to see how many security measures there actually are.
- EJTower, on 12/17/2007, -2/+15Because these people suffer from a limited conceptual range when it comes to technology. Lou Dobbs' audience mostly requires walkers to get around, and think cellphones are those communicators from the original Star Trek.
- RossDuprey, on 12/17/2007, -0/+13I will accept electronic counters of paper ballots, because if need be, we can resort to recounting the paper ballots. But this system that is completely electronic is unacceptable.
- mrcabnit, on 12/17/2007, -0/+11i believe its "all your votes are belong to us"
- epicstruggle, on 12/17/2007, -7/+17This is only one part of how to steal elections. For decades (if not centuries) we have had the dead vote, mutiple votes by one individual, and voting by people not eligible to vote. Why is digg more obsessed with one type of fraud when the others probably happen more often? I realize Ill be dugg down, but hope some take the time to answer me.
The supreme court plans on hearing a case on states requiring some sort of ID card to vote. I hope they let the law stand, so at least we can start curbing some of the low-tech election fraud. - slipkn0tz23, on 12/17/2007, -0/+10its not really old news.. its an old video. voting machines still work the same exact way, its not like these are out of date.
- EJTower, on 12/17/2007, -2/+12If you have proof or articles about the other forms of vote rigging then submit them, and direct peoples attention to them. Also, stop talking about Digg like its an entity in itself. We're just a bunch of people here voting things up and down as it interests or pisses us off. It pissed me off, so I Dugg it.
Regards,
~E. - gusx, on 12/17/2007, -0/+9Exactly, having reachable IO devices just screams for getting hacked. Even with that little key-lock. weird they haven't tought about it.
- paimei01, on 12/17/2007, -0/+9"Each electronic vote in Venezuela also produces a ticket that voters then drop into a ballot box," Gould said. "Unlike fully electronic systems, this gives a backup that can be used to counter claims of massive fraud."
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2004/11/02/170271 ... - v3n0m42, on 12/17/2007, -0/+8lulz im voting for Benedict Arnold, god save the queen mate!
- Micktion, on 12/17/2007, -3/+11If CNN were any sort of real investigative news organisation, they would be investigating the last US elections and revealing the truth.
This story to me looks like an attempt to cover up the riggging of US elections.... "What shock ! These machines are so easy to hack, anyone could have done it ! I guess there's no way of knowing who could have tampered with machines now."... *****.
These are not flaws in these machines, they're design features, these machines are obviously designed to allow elections to be rigged.
Their should be an investigation into the design process and deployment of these machines, as well as into anyone who had knowledge required to rig a voting machine at the time of the election. I'm sure such an investigation would eventually lead to neo-cons with bank accounts well and truely fattened over Bush's term in office. - ColonelJessup, on 12/17/2007, -0/+8I can see it now........ Ron Paul wins, voting machines hacked. Ron Paul loses, voting machinges hacked.
Why even use these stupid machines anyways? What is wrong with a damn piece of paper with a damn box next to your damn candidate that you make a damn checkmark in to make your damn choice for the damn nominee? - ghostlywind, on 12/17/2007, -5/+12I'm in your voting machine
Stealing your votes - 0xception, on 12/17/2007, -0/+7Several university (Rice, Standford, U of Iowa...etc) are currently undergoing joint research as a government funded project in order to determine the quality and feasibility of electronic voting and election systems in general... One of my professors who was apart of this has been doing voting security for years, and has always said that the technology is only but a minor annoyance in the security of the system as a whole, The real issue has always been and will always be the vulnerability of the elections system by the staffers and managers of th election. Unless we can devise some way to remove them from the equation or prove the security of the system beyond a doubt. there are a lot of great ideas out there, however the issues a lot of the times comes down the the exact wording of our election/voting laws. So i agree with you, this is only a small issue.
That being said, Diebold has been well aware of their security issues for probably nearly 5 years now... At one point they attempted to sell their machines to my state election officials, and several security experts went to the meeting and were apart of the commission to look them over, and when they asked Diebold what type of system they use to manage their cryptographic keys they said "We dont use any...we don't have a problem with key management"... why might you ask? because they only have 1 single cryptographic key for all their machines. at this point the state turned them down. They are some of the most ill conceived security devices I've ever read about (considering the requirements), and yet they still exists with these exact same problem (although in this video they talk about a physical key which looks to only be a 4 or 5 pinned sprint lock (god lets hope those aren't wafers) ). So like others before me it seem one of the only conclusions you can reasonably come to is that this is a feature... All the more reason for open source software in government run applications and electronic voting. - iAlex, on 12/17/2007, -2/+9"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years......It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." - David Rockefeller, Source: Trilateral Commission meeting, June, 1991
- smurf22, on 12/17/2007, -1/+8Sideways hack!
- jlhoben, on 12/17/2007, -0/+7This is sickening!
- BackEnThaWomb, on 12/17/2007, -0/+6oh....thats how bush won...i got it
- Micktion, on 12/17/2007, -0/+6I totally agree with you. Just look at the operating systems on mobile phones, most of which have security that will stop any piece of code being executed that has not been digitally signed with a private 256 byte digital certificate, basically stopping unauthorised applications being run on the device.
This cannot be the result of negligence or incompetence, the only possible explaination for this is that the systems have been designed to allow elections to be rigged.
It would also explain the huge discrepency between the election results and exit poles.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/wa ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._presidentia ...
"The November 3rd 12:23 am election-day exit poll results conducted for the National Election Pool (NEP) by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International [2] predicted John Kerry winning the popular vote by 5 million, while the official results gave George W. Bush the win with a popular margin of 3 million, an 8 million vote (6.5%) difference"
It would also explain how some precincts managed to record more votes than registered voters, or impossibly high voter turnouts. - MalDON, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5Then digg would become a prison activity voting website.
- 0xception, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5was it just that the voting place had an internet connection with an open Wifi or were the voting machines on that network?? if would be really really bad if the latter were true... either way it looks bad, but they could have reasonably setup a secure network via virtual lans or had off line machines... not that those still arn't vulnerable, just not to your average script kiddie
- Micktion, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5Doesn't fulfill the system's requirements: it would make rigging elections a lot harder.
- themastersb, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5This is how Bush won both elections probably.
- neko6, on 12/17/2007, -0/+5Why not simply follow the world's best cryptographers and replace our archaic voting protocol with one of the recently developed protocols, thus having elections that CANNOT BE FIXED?
One example of such a protocol: http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~talm/papers/MN06 ...
Please digg me up and also repost this wherever relevant - blogs discussing voting, digg/slashdot/reddit/etc. If we can spend billions in voting machines, we can spend a few more millions in having elections that are actually verifiable. - 0xception, on 12/17/2007, -0/+4Diebold has had similar issues w/ their security for more then 5 years now, and nothing of those previous issues gets fixed so i would assume neither has this. granted i haven't researched any recent news on these issues. However I know nearly 5 years ago their machines only used a single cryptographic key for all of their machines everywhere... when this issues was brought up to them and one of their techs, they didn't seem to see the security problem. years later that same issues had not been resolved. At this point i would never trust anything from Diebold.
- RaptorNv25, on 12/17/2007, -1/+5Because the reporter is a woman.
- Vorin, on 12/17/2007, -1/+4sorry, i'll help him win legitimately..
- UrbanOne, on 12/17/2007, -0/+3As gldfshnpcklejar mentioned above, this report is more than 1 year old. The submitter should have done some homework if they truly were more interested in the issue of secure and accurate elections as opposed to getting on the front page of Digg.
I agree this is unacceptable and embarrassing. It's one more nail in the coffin of our democracy. I have no idea if this issue has been fixed. Perhaps the submitter could do some more research and get back to us with the truth? - 0xception, on 12/17/2007, -0/+3I'm sure you think it's kinda funny... but that goes against everything that the Ron Paul people are suppose to stand for. and while you maybe joking, it still worries me that other might not.
- masterm1nd, on 12/17/2007, -4/+7Ehh, he'll stick to hacking diggs algorithm.
- SwiftP, on 12/17/2007, -0/+3Please do a vote watch to decrease vote theft in Iowa and NH: http://youtube.com/watch?v=SkmmNft0g3Q
- combatchuck, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2Damn right!
- Delphium226, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2The machines have to be quick and easy to 'hack' for local repugs. They're not the brightest. Great job Diebold.
- inactive, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2THANK YOU MR DOBBS! you are doing a great service to this country, someone in the mainstream with the balls to tell the public what they NEED to know
- icebrk, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2they must be ignorant, everyone knows cell phones these days are 100x better than those clunky old things.
- apeweek, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2Chalk up the hanging chads to defective punchcards sent to democratic florida counties on purpose.
http://www.digg.com/politics/Documentary_Defective ... - apeweek, on 12/17/2007, -0/+2I don't doubt that there are many polling places that try to do security right. There are many others, however, with security holes (like sending machines home with pollworkers overnight), or that prevent people from observing how the votes are tallied. Does your jurisdiction allow observers while the votes are being counted? This is one of the biggest security holes, where the hackable Diebold GEMS tabulator can be used, for instance.
I understand that those tamper-evident seals can sometimes be defeated by simply removing the entire plastic cover to the machine. And the printouts can be forged. There's a revealing video on the BlackBoxVoting site where that was shown to have happened (the real printouts, with signatures, were found in a trash bag.) -
Show 51 - 100 of 104 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is