Reply #18: The scenario I see involves very few people, but they ARE programmers. [View All]

[petgoat]

That is in line with Christopher Hitchens's essay about Ohio

"I had the chance to spend quality time with someone who came to me well
recommended, who did not believe that fraud had yet actually been
demonstrated, whose background was in the manufacture of the machines,
and who wanted to be anonymous. It certainly could be done, she said,
and only a very, very few people would have to be “in on it.” This is
because of the small number of firms engaged in the manufacturing and
the even smaller number of people, subject as they are to the hiring
practices of these firms, who understand the technology. “Machines were
put in place with no sampling to make sure they were ‘in control’ and no
comparison studies,” she explained. “The code of the machines is not
public knowledge, and none of these machines has since been impounded.”
In these circumstances, she continued, it’s possible to manipulate both
the count and the proportions of votes."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0503/S00121.htm



"who and where is the rogue programmer?"

Quite a pregnant question, I would say. It's occurred to me that if
software patches are distributed on those smart memory cards, that
somebody need only substitute an altered card for the master card--the
one they copy all the others from. And the janitor or the shipping
clerk could do that.

Diebold already showed their absolute disregard for security when they
left their source code out on the internet for any rogue hacker in the
world to see.