Posted on 09/12/2017 7:53:50 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
The country’s voting machines are susceptible to hacking, which could be done in a way so that it leaves no fingerprints, making it impossible to know whether the outcome was changed, computer experts told President Trump’s voter integrity commission Tuesday.
The testimony marked a departure for the commission, which was formed to look into fraud and barriers to voting, but which heard that a potentially greater threat to confidence in American elections is the chance for enemy actors to meddle.
“There’s no perfect security; there’s only degrees of insecurity,” said Ronald Rivest, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
He said hackers have myriad ways of attacking voting machines. “You don’t want to rest the election of the president on, ‘Maybe the Wi-Fi was turned on when it shouldn’t have been.’”
He and two other computer security experts said bar codes on ballots and smartphones in voting locations could give hackers a chance to rewrite results in ways that couldn’t be traceable, short of sampling of ballots or hand recounts — and those work only in cases where there is a paper trail.
Andrew Appel, a professor at Princeton University, said that it would be easy to write a program that cheats on election results and deletes evidence of the hack as soon as the results are reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
there is a trace of evidence. A Democrat winning.
It’s the only way they can win - through cheating.
And it didn’t seem to work out for them last November...
Bookmark
FYI!
Maybe it worked in New Hampshire & Minnesota.
Let's just amplify this a little bit, my good FRiend...
...Wow! Wow! Wow! Congress, are you listening?
.
And that, folks, is how Hillary won the popular vote
Man, this is old news for it to sound “new.”
Paper counts may take time but it seems the only secure way and even then with massive security.
There are plenty of paper cheats out there !
Dont kid yourself.
When you vote, isn’t there a number on the ballot? It should be made possible to have access to the results of that ballot at a later time. Say a week after I vote, I wish I could go to my computer and type in that number to see the results are as I voted- people for office and ballots. I have my ballot stub, so complaints can be made if the results are not as I voted.
Which is why the old addage holds true in this case: No nation can survive without the integrity of the common man.
What we need in America is SPIRITUAL REVIVAL in massive numbers, and ASAP.
Think that thought through to the end point.
You do not want your identity linked to how you voted.
If so, people would be able to be paid or intimidated for their vote.
(that is why we call it a secret ballot)
That’s why I said with massive security.
My id would not be known. If I see my results are wrong, that’s not a big deal, but 50,000 voters also complaining-—that would be a problem.
If my id is known as soon as I receive the ballot, then that is a problem, but that is the current procedure anyway.
Trackable paper ballots only.
Minimum 2 years jail time for anyone caught trying to rig an election.
ID required before voting.
Announcements radio, tv, Spanish and English prior to election day that if you are not legally a citizen of this country, you are not allowed to vote period, no matter what the democrat party tells you. Attempt to vote, it will be much easier for officials to find you and deport you.
(It should be a no brainer not to vote in a country's election that you snuck into, but they don't seem to get it.)
They must have bought into the warm and fuzzy BS that the dems CARE about them.politician "cares" about them? They are all out for themselves. It's human nature. That's why limited government works best and benefits the most people.
More government=more greed and corruption. An example is Venezuela - Can someone explain explain why the people are starving while Hugo Chavez's (first Socialist leader) daughter, (or grand daughter?) is now worth millions, or is it billions, of dollars?
Funny how those who eagerly plan how your money will be redistributed are not so willing to redistribute their own wealth for the "common good".
How does Rivest propose to hack a voting machine which counts marks on paper ballots "without a trace of evidence"? If the ballots are examined in a recount, which is often done by hand, or by another computer based scanning system, then how would the hack not have "a trace of evidence" since the mismatch of the paper ballot hand count and the original hacked machine count would be very strong evidence of a failure of the initial system. And the correct result would be ascertained from the ballots, even if the original machine was hacked.
Also many academics who write and speak about election issues with alarming rhetoric haven't really thought through the ways in which the overall system works. It is easy to say "anybody can write a program to alter the results" but while that may be true in many cases the hacker has to penetrate physical security systems to get to the memory chips or mass storage devices they need to replace to install the rogue code, or tamper with results.
In a lot of situations that is harder than it looks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.