Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Playergamer]

Number 3...I wouldn't be surprised if thst would lead to "compromises" where the different parties shared keys to carve out chunks of the country for each other.

[Reelya]

But they'd still have to fake the timestamps to the national servers, match that to timestamps inside the computer's memory, then make sure they can re-encrypt it so that the data looks valid. As well as faking the correct number of paper ballots/receipts in the boxes next to the machines. Just accessing the drive only allows you to de-encrypt and examine the data, not actual add new data in a valid way.

All while would have to be going on while the polling place is open to the public and in full view. So in other words, the worst case scenario is that they fake the votes by actually operating the voting machines in real time, and put all the receipts into the boxes, so that it appears valid. Which is  Even the worst case isn't as feasible to be rigged as the same sort of collusion by merely stuff paper into a box.

[nenjin]

But they'd still have to fake the timestamps to th national servers, the paper ballot/receipt trail, as well as actually operate the machines. All while the polling place is open to the public and this is going on in full view. It's just not as feasible as the same sort of collusion by merely stuff paper into a box.

It's not hard to create a function to fake time stamps as soon as data is inserted into the DB. Or to retroactively update said timestamps. If no one is watching the data hen house, it's very easy to manipulate the data.

[Reelya]

But you're talking about someone rigging the entire national system then, which is another issue.

You'd have to have operatives on the ground at each polling place to rig the machines, and perfectly synchronize with people rigging the entire national database at the same time, all while the local people ensure that the paper ballots in boxes match what's in both the database, and each separate machine. The paper ballots have serial numbers too from what I recall, so it would be easy to e.g. make them have a barcode, then the counters use a barcode reader and you ensure that what each machine spat out is what the other two separate databases say they spat out. Very difficult to rig such as system.

[smjjames]

Number 3...I wouldn't be surprised if thst would lead to "compromises" where the different parties shared keys to carve out chunks of the country for each other.

Easy answer to that is to look at countries who use that and see how they keep it from ending up like you describe.

Besides, encryption codes, whether partial, can be leaked or lost and a determined hacker could get through (or around) the encryption codes, so, it would have to be backed up by multiple redundant systems to ensure that it doesn't get hacked or people try to corrupt the proccess.

Also, ow, ninjas

[Reelya]

Also, knowing the encryption code doesn't necessarily let you easily alter the data for the device. It would be easy to ensure you've actually got to pull the drive out and put it into a different machine to actually edit it.

Even if that could be done, it would cause a discrepancy with the other two independent sets of the same data (realtime reporting and the paper ballots).

[mainiac]

There's also the assumption that hundreds of people on the opposite sides of ideology are all mustache twirling conspirators who are willing to risk life in prison for the sake of being evil... 

[Playergamer]

lol, i wasnt saying opposite sides. I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if, if we gave the encryption keys to the major parties (of which i am a member) they could cooperate to cut out chunks for each party.

They might play that image of "reps hate dems, dems hate rebs," but if they can both gain from working together, they will.

Of course, I don't know anything bout this stuff.

[smjjames]

Well yeah, and to me, the encryption system sounds like it would foster distrust, which is not something we need more of in our politics.

Also, the US isn't the only one who has had problems (although from english language Wikipedia, it appears that problems are documented more often for the US than others) and a good deal of the problems seem to come down to hardware glitches (paper jamming, touchscreen issues) and software glitches. Though hacking and manipulation has definetly happened at least once.

lol, i wasnt saying opposite sides. I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if, if we gave the encryption keys to the major parties (of which i am a member) they could cooperate to cut out chunks for each party.

They might play that image of "reps hate dems, dems hate rebs," but if they can both gain from working together, they will.

Of course, I don't know anything bout this stuff.

They already cut out chunks via gerrymandering.

[Lord Shonus]

4- print out a paper receipt, which goes into a box. This is more to assauge fears of the unseen digital stuff going on, but it gives you a third way of auditing the machine, which should match the data from the other two methods.

Every voting machine I've ever used does this.

[mainiac]

They might play that image of "reps hate dems, dems hate rebs," but if they can both gain from working together, they will.

https://xkcd.com/661/

The great thing about being a cynic is you can spout the most unbelievable things without any evidence whatsoever.

[Playergamer]

....no evidence...because it hasn't happened yet.

Listen, mainiac. I have no idea how you can argue with everybody about everything, but I'm not getting sucked in. I really do not care about this.

[TheBiggerFish]

....no evidence...because it hasn't happened yet.

Listen, mainiac. I have no idea how you can argue with everybody about everything, but I'm not getting sucked in. I really do not care about this.

I think it was a joke?

[Reelya]

That reminds me of talking to local socialists (always the college-age ones, not the older ones).

They claim that we need a revolution because working through the "bourgeois" electoral system can never effect positive change. i.e. the idea of passing laws that have some positive effect is nonsense. But of course they don't contend that bad things can't happen through the electoral process. Logically if some change in government policy is objectively bad then the inverse policy must be objective good, thus disproving the "revolutionary socialist" idea that no good things can come from the electoral process.

So, you have this 0.01% of the population "working" on creating a popular revolution in one of the most stable and wealthiest Western nations (Australia). And they'll claim right to your face that working to effect change through the electoral system is a complete waste of time and you should be out handing out pamphlets about overthrowing the oppressive system with them, so that you're not wasting your time I guess ...

But I can see their logic: when the unemployed people realize the $300 per week they get for sitting on their asses, the free healthcare, and subsidized housing isn't enough they will naturally rise up against their oppressors.

[mainiac]

I much prefer the Bernie Sanders revolution, maybe things would suck less if people got off their assess and got excited about an election for a change.