Election by Hackers

[shocka khan]

the only way tpo be safe from hacks is to not be on the Internet.

Do you think the possibility of a hack might be a good reason to have total audit capability of the results and have the paper records from the voting machines available to be tallied in case of something unusual showing up in the results? That's what Beth Clarkson (statistician for the National Institute for Aerospace Research) wants in Kansas. Right now we have laws preventing any recount, so if we get hacked, there's nothing we can do.

There is one safety measure against being hacked. Be boring. With that in mind , Kansas is pretty much immune from hackers.

Yes. If records are poorly kept and there is not an audit trail, you're definitely up **** creek without a paddle. If I were a judge hearing that kind of a case, I would probably throw the whole election out and schedule a new one.

I would also appoint a special master to oversee the elections commission (and your illustrious secretary of state) until such time as a verifiable, repeatable process (something that would make it auditable, bu the way) could be developed.

I bet Kobach would be moving so fast to get **** fixed that it would make the collective heads of Kansas spin like a merry-go-round.

At this point in time, he has no incentive to fix the process. And the legislature is aiding and abetting him by throwing shade to him.

[shocka khan]

I wasn't talking about the State Department breach. I was talking about the intrusion into Office of Personnel Management's information systems that was not detected for over a year. I think you are missing the point - if these hackers can penetrate the federal government security - the states security will be no match unless they they are still using the chad system. 2nd, if those states are admitting a "partial breach" right now - you can bet it much, much worse. The first thing bureaucrats do is go full CYA to avoid accountability.

Sorry for keeping on topic, as this thread is entitled 'Election by Hackers'. Sorry my keeping on topic confused you. My apologies. Have a great day!

[Play Angry]

You can pretty much guarantee that the losing candidate and/or their surrogates will use suspicion of hacking to cast doubt on the outcome. There won't be a gracious loser between these two sacks of ****.

[shocka khan]

the only way tpo be safe from hacks is to not be on the Internet.

Do you think the possibility of a hack might be a good reason to have total audit capability of the results and have the paper records from the voting machines available to be tallied in case of something unusual showing up in the results? That's what Beth Clarkson (statistician for the National Institute for Aerospace Research) wants in Kansas. Right now we have laws preventing any recount, so if we get hacked, there's nothing we can do.

There is one safety measure against being hacked. Be boring. With that in mind , Kansas is pretty much immune from hackers.

That's why SCADA networks have been run in isolation for years. Most of them also had proprietary operating systems. Now they all run on Windows :O. And if they are connected to the internet (like the ones controlling the dam lock in upstate New York) in any way (including for patching) and someone gets into the system (like the Iranians did) you will have a potentially huge problem.

That's why DHS has had securing critical infrastructure as a priority for years (power grid, gas pipelines, refineries, transmission systems and potentially bank ATM systems).

[MoValley John]

That's why SCADA networks have been run in isolation for years. Most of them also had proprietary operating systems. Now they all run on Windows :O. And if they are connected to the internet (like the ones controlling the dam lock in upstate New York) in any way (including for patching) and someone gets into the system (like the Iranians did) you will have a potentially huge problem.

That's why DHS has had securing critical infrastructure as a priority for years (power grid, gas pipelines, refineries, transmission systems and potentially bank ATM systems).

14125124951015457725837966895435175538016904088795o.jpg

[SB Shock]

Sorry for keeping on topic, as this thread is entitled 'Election by Hackers'. Sorry my keeping on topic confused you. My apologies. Have a great day!

I believe we all know who the one who is confused....

[SB Shock]

That's why DHS has had securing critical infrastructure as a priority for years (power grid, gas pipelines, refineries, transmission systems and potentially bank ATM systems).

if DHS can't secure their own infrastructure, how can they secure anybody else's?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-security-idUSKCN0VH22H

[Cdizzle]

nm

[Kung Wu]

You can pretty much guarantee that the losing candidate and/or their surrogates will use suspicion of hacking to cast doubt on the outcome. There won't be a gracious loser between these two sacks of ****.

Yet, unfortunately, the losing sack of **** might be right.

[MoValley John]

Yet, unfortunately, the losing sack of **** will be right.

Fixed.

Demcrats cry election foul every election, but every election, its democrats that get caught cheating. I sum it up to projection.

[MoValley John]

https://youtu.be/Gh0Wc5hsV8U

I geew up in Illinois, the democrats have always cheated and always blamed republicans for cheating.

[Kung Wu]

Russians vs Soros' voting machine company?

[Kung Wu]

Only real question is which side the hackers are on. This is a much bigger deal than the average American realizes: http://www.computerworld.com/article...g-machine.html