bugtraq - Re: Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked

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: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:00:02 -0600
From: Keith Oxenrider <koxenrider@...-biotech.com>
To: "Jay D. Dyson" <jdyson@...achery.net>
Cc: Jei <jei@...hut.fi>, Bugtraq <bugtraq@...urityfocus.com>,
   full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked

I am positive the fraud has been going on for quite some time, likely all 
along.  As the amount of detailed data available in electronic format 
increases so does the ability to quickly and easily analyze, allowing for 
better cause to effect correlation.  When elections are not close few take 
the time to analyze the data and if they do they are likely to report their 
results in obscure locations long after the event.  In this particular case 
the reported results did not match up well with the latest polls which 
encouraged even more scrutiny.  If this additional focus is bringing to 
light inconsistencies that have been going on for decades, why should they 
be dismissed just because they have been happening all along?  With better 
information and motivated researchers (not _all_ are partisan) perhaps 
there will be enough interest to finally shed some light in this dark and 
murky process.  I can at least hope and pray that it will be so.

At 04:33 PM 11/10/2004 -0800, Jay D. Dyson wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Keith Oxenrider wrote:
>
> > No one in the security biz would accept the use of a closed-source
> > cryptography system, why the heck are we using a closed source election
> > system?
>
>         On this we are in total agreement.  I would much prefer that we
>push Diebold out of the picture and put open source solutions in play.
>And I'm certainly open to that possibility as it would afford critical
>design review from top to bottom.
>
>         But let's be clear on one thing right now: we've been relying on
>technology to do our vote-tallying for decades...long before this one
>election.  Making claims of fraud now is disingenuous; particularly since
>it's only made when a Democrat loses his bid for the Presidency.
>
>- -Jay
>
>    (    (                                                        _______
>    ))   ))   .-"There's always time for a good cup of coffee"-.   >====<--.
>  C|~~|C|~~| (>----- Jay D. Dyson -- jdyson@...achery.net -----<) |    = |-'
>   `--' `--'  `------ Burn me up and I'll burn you down. ------'  `------'
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (TreacherOS)
>Comment: See http://www.treachery.net/~jdyson/ for current keys.
>
>iD8DBQFBkrNqBYoRACwSF0cRAv9bAKCGHGqmn+2mLHTTYSsncpTG9HK5AQCfQHF/
>D2ApUPHhJ+wtOmEXOibTkto=
>=t2u1
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html