Subject:
|
Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Oct 2006 17:30:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2049 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
|
| |
| |
It would be like a double-blind study. Surely you aren’t implying
that the technology doesn’t exist to competently carry out the task when
we’ve already, on multiple occasions, put men on the moon (who don’t blow
their lines;-)
|
Certainly it’s possible. Diebold just doesn’t seem up to the task. They
needed to do something along the lines of (say) offer a $50,000 prize to the
first person/group who can verifiably find a weakness in their systems. Then,
fix problems and re-run the contest, until nobody can hack it.
Better yet, publish the source code so people can find holes in it. You could
argue that this allows 3rd party hackers knowledge into how to hack the
system, but even WORSE is if you’ve got only a select group of *insiders* who
know the same vulnerabilities, because it’s much less likely to get noticed,
and will continue to persist.
|
Yeah, there’s gotta be a way. Or, maybe the code is owned by the government and
Diebold merely provides the hardware? I’m no expert in this area, but it seems
to me that electronic voting shouldn’t be such a huge issue.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
