About texson1986


Real Name:
Harold Thomas
Gender:
male
Date of Birth:
June 19, 1967
Member Since:
October 24, 2007
Last Signed In:
May 03, 2008
Profile Views:
367
Blog Views:
1582
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Texas Legislators Caught voting for other members! Busted. "Video"
THIS IS SICKINING & SHOCKING! SHOW EVERYBODY!!!
Ron Paul Progress Report (video)
Did Huckabee lie at the debate the other night? You bet he did
Ron Paul Unveils a Real Economic Stimulus Plan
Restore The Republic
Palestinians break out of Gaza (video)
Stock Markets in Europe Plunge 7 Percent
The MLK Bomb has started +Video
Chinese Navy Confronted USS Kitty Hawk
Archives
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08

"What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think." --Adolf Hitler

   
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL
texson1986 - > -> Princeton University Exposes Diebold Flaws
Princeton University Exposes Diebold Flaws
The following video was produced by Princeton University. It explains precisely how the votes are stolen and will be stolen again.

Princeton tested an AccuVote-TS which it obtained from a private party. The experiements were designed to determine whether the machine could be hacked under "real election practices", realistic scenarios in the real world. Princeton found the machine vulnerable to a number of "extremely serious attacks" that "undermine undermine the accuracy and credibility of the vote counts it produces." In other words, DieBold machines can be hacked and most have been. Princeton points out that computer specialists are skeptical of Direct Recording Machines (DRE), essentially general purpose machines running specialized election software. The biggest flaw, according to Princeton, is that DREs are dependent upon the "correct and secure operation of complex software programs" In the real word, that simply does not happen. Ominously, DRE failures most likely go undetected. ..Main Findings The main findings of our study are:
Malicious software running on a single voting machine can steal
votes with little if any risk of detection. The malicious software can modify all of the records, audit logs, and counters kept by the voting machine, so that even careful forensic examination of these records will find nothing amiss. We have constructed demonstration software that carries out this vote-stealing attack.
Anyone who has physical access to a voting machine, or to a memory card that will later be inserted into a machine, can install said
malicious software using a simple method that takes as little as one minute. In practice, poll workers and others often have unsupervised access to the machines.

AccuVote-TS machines are susceptible to voting-machine
viruses — computer viruses that can spread malicious software automatically and invisibly from machine to machine during normal pre-and post-election activity. We have constructed a demonstration virus that spreads in this way, installing our demonstration vote-stealing program on every machine it infects.
While some of these problems can be eliminated by improving Diebold's software, others cannot be remedied without replacing the machines' hardware. Changes to election procedures would also be required to ensure security.

...

Abstract This paper presents a fully independent security study of a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine, including its hardware and software. We obtained the machine from a private party. Analysis of the machine, in light of real election procedures, shows that it is vulnerable to extremely serious attacks. For example, an attacker who gets physical access to a machine or its removable memory card for as little as one minute could install malicious code; malicious code on a machine could steal votes undetectably, modifying all records, logs, and counters to be consistent with the fraudulent vote count it creates. An attacker could also create malicious code that spreads automatically and silently from machine to machine during normal election activities — a voting-machine virus. We have constructed working demonstrations of these attacks in our lab. Mitigating these threats will require changes to the voting machine's hardware and software and the adoption of more rigorous election procedures.

--Ariel J. Feldman, J. Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten,Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine

Tags:
posted by texson1986 on Friday, January 11, 2008 at 06:47 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 16 times
1 comments from 1 users

1

posted by ShureleeUJest on Jan 11, 2008 at 05:55 PM
So that's it!  I wondered why Gore got so many votes! LOL
1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the blog post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, we need you to prove that you're a human being.
Please enter the text from the image at left.