full-disclosure - In USA the Government Votes for YOU? - Electronic Voting Systems'Security, Report

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue Jun 14 22:22:07 2005
From: bkfsec at sdf.lonestar.org (bkfsec)
Subject: In USA the Government Votes for YOU?
	-	Electronic Voting Systems'Security, Report

Paul Schmehl wrote:

> Interesting in what way?  There's one unsubstantiated claim of 
> electronic voting machines in one area that "transferred" an unknown 
> number of votes from Kerry to Bush.  The entire rest of the report has 
> to do with procedural complaints that have applicability to any 
> security issues that I'm aware of.  There's no evidence presented of 
> fraud or malfunction issues regarding electronic voting machines other 
> than the single unsubstantiated claim mentioned above.
>
> If you're referring to the broader issue of fairness in elections, 
> I'll get excited about Conyers' report when the Democrats thoroughly 
> investigate Wisconsin and Washington.  Until then, their complaints 
> fall on deaf ears.
>

Wisconsin and Washington are apples and oranges when compared to the 
potential scope of fraud in Ohio or Florida.  Most democrats would agree 
with you, though, that investigations should occur (myself included)... 
that is, non-biased investigations with the intent of finding out any 
errors that actually occurred and repairing them.

Of course, we could just reply to the republican disgust over Washington 
and Wisconsin by just repeating the often used line "Get over it", but 
that would too far expose the hypocrisy of the roght-wing agenda.  And 
that such complaints would fall on deaf ears with you, Paul, is not 
surprising.

In any case, you're right about one thing... as interesting as this 
report is, it's probably not entirely relevent here; but I suspect 
that's not the real reason that you objected to its content.

             -Barry