“Studies have shown that for all their known faults, paper ballots are more securable and reliable than the electronics, which can be hacked in many ways including the installations of the firmware in the secret manufacturing sites in Communist China.”
Studies paid for by those who oppose modernization of the voting system. Modernization to include actually using ID’s to verify the people are who they say they are.
Electronics are perfectly able to be secure. After all our entire banking system is run on computers. I believe thats the real fear. that the system will be made secure and the people who have helped dead people vote for years will be stopped.
The banking system uses paper trails as backups
and is audited.
There’s a big difference there.
“Electronics are perfectly able to be secure.”
As an EE who has done a lot of design of secure computer systems and cryptographic systems, I don’t share your opinion.
Anything that doesn’t leave a paper audit trail is not acceptable, in my opinion.
Additionally, when systems like these are compromised, they are compromised in a big way and it’s difficult to detect.
Remember the recent ruckus over the breaking of the DVD copy protection scheme?
They spent millions of dollars to develop this protection scheme and all the “experts” said it was secure.
It was broken by a bunch of neophyte hackers with too much time on their hands.
JMHO!