95% Of IT Pros QUESTION Election Booth Security

[OKTexas]

95% OF IT PROS QUESTION ELECTION BOOTH SECURITY
Only 5% of IT pros feel very confident in election booth security…

95% of IT Pros Question Election Booth Security

You'll have to read the article at the link, it doesn't allow the copy function.

With this and all the dead people and illegals registering, kind of makes you wonder if anything is really safe anymore.

 

[BULLDOG]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

 

[OKTexas]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

The article is by one of the leading PC security companies in the world. You can take it or leave it, I don't give a crap.

 

[candycorn]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

 

[Asclepias]

They must not have very smart IT professionals at Spicegirls....I mean Spiceworks.

"To find out, PC Matic Pro conducted a poll with the IT Pro community on Spiceworks to see what they had to say. "

 

[Asclepias]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

 

[Siete]

we can always let the SC stare at chads, then make a ruling.

seems to be the way to go is you're a Republican.

 

[candycorn]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

 

[Asclepias]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

They have to get their rationalization straight as to why Drumpf lost. First they say that liberals are too stupid now they claim all liberals are professional hackers.

 

[BULLDOG]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

The article is by one of the leading PC security companies in the world. You can take it or leave it, I don't give a crap.

The survey was from people who decided to click on one of a couple of buttons after reading articles about possible security problems with voting machines. Most participants probably weren't even IT professionals. Just people who clicked on an article about voting machine security with a pessimistic view. Right wingers will believe anything as long as it matches their preconceived beliefs.

 

[owebo]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

Answer them yourself you uneducated tool....

George Soros is in charge of your vote counting!

 

[owebo]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

The article is by one of the leading PC security companies in the world. You can take it or leave it, I don't give a crap.

The survey was from people who decided to click on one of a couple of buttons after reading articles about possible security problems with voting machines. Most participants probably weren't even IT professionals. Just people who clicked on an article about voting machine security with a pessimistic view. Right wingers will believe anything as long as it matches their preconceived beliefs.

And then, there is you.....

 

[BULLDOG]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

The article is by one of the leading PC security companies in the world. You can take it or leave it, I don't give a crap.

The survey was from people who decided to click on one of a couple of buttons after reading articles about possible security problems with voting machines. Most participants probably weren't even IT professionals. Just people who clicked on an article about voting machine security with a pessimistic view. Right wingers will believe anything as long as it matches their preconceived beliefs.

And then, there is you.....

View attachment 93508

Got it. You admit the OP is bullshit, but that doesn't matter as long as you can insult someone.

 

[owebo]

So a self selected web page poll. The polls taken here are more scientific and accurate at reflecting opinions. You don't know that?

The article is by one of the leading PC security companies in the world. You can take it or leave it, I don't give a crap.

The survey was from people who decided to click on one of a couple of buttons after reading articles about possible security problems with voting machines. Most participants probably weren't even IT professionals. Just people who clicked on an article about voting machine security with a pessimistic view. Right wingers will believe anything as long as it matches their preconceived beliefs.

And then, there is you.....

View attachment 93508

Got it. You admit the OP is bullshit, but that doesn't matter as long as you can insult someone.

I don't consider you fascist democrats human....sorry if that wasn't clear....

 

[hadit]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

They have to get their rationalization straight as to why Drumpf lost. First they say that liberals are too stupid now they claim all liberals are professional hackers.

That's kind of a stupid complaint. Any IT savvy person (that is a bunch of professionals and virtually any kid under the age of 14) knows it only takes one hacker to break into a data store and alter its contents. The majority of self identified liberals are not above average in intelligence.

Here's an IT reality. There is NO data repository connected in any way to the internet that is totally safe from breach. None. The best you can hope for is to make breaching it take long enough that a hacker will give up and attack an easier target.

If you really want to make electronic voting as secure as possible, print a paper receipt for the voter so he can go online later and verify that his recorded vote matches his receipt. It wouldn't stop fraud and wouldn't stop democrats from registering dead voters, but it would at least let a voter know that his vote was recorded accurately.

 

[easyt65]

The massive assault on computers should be evidence enough that we need to go back to the paper ballot system until (if) we can create a secure fool-proof system...

....however, the Democratic Primaries demonstrated paper ballots are probably less secure that chancing hacked electronic voting machines, based on the numerous reports of DNC Poll Officials changing votes / being WATCHED changing people's votes for Hillary.

We are less that 28 days out from the election, and already there are numerous reports all over the country of election / voter fraud.

With Hillary facing potential jail time if she loses, I think we are going to see the most election fraud we've ever seen this election. If she gets caught she could go to jail (if tied to her). If she loses the election she could go to jail. She has nothing to lose..... this election, IMO, is going to make the corrupt DNC Primaries look tame by comparison.

 

[whitehall]

What kind of "security problems" are they talking about? The kind where the most important foreign policy official in the U.S. hires a mom and pop operation to handle E-mails out of a freaking bathroom? Personally I think the election officials who handle electronic voting machines are smarter than Hillary.

 

[Asclepias]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

They have to get their rationalization straight as to why Drumpf lost. First they say that liberals are too stupid now they claim all liberals are professional hackers.

That's kind of a stupid complaint. Any IT savvy person (that is a bunch of professionals and virtually any kid under the age of 14) knows it only takes one hacker to break into a data store and alter its contents. The majority of self identified liberals are not above average in intelligence.

Here's an IT reality. There is NO data repository connected in any way to the internet that is totally safe from breach. None. The best you can hope for is to make breaching it take long enough that a hacker will give up and attack an easier target.

If you really want to make electronic voting as secure as possible, print a paper receipt for the voter so he can go online later and verify that his recorded vote matches his receipt. It wouldn't stop fraud and wouldn't stop democrats from registering dead voters, but it would at least let a voter know that his vote was recorded accurately.

I disagree. All you need to do is route the date via VPN. The data is automatically encrypted and would take too long to decrypt in order to effect an election. That would also stop any man in the middle attacks as the session itself is encrypted. I agree we should have some sort of check but that wont work too well if someone decides to change their vote because they had second thoughts.

 

[hadit]

The only thing I wonder about is why you guys continually bring up that the Democrats somehow steal the elections when you guys seem to do very well in off years.

If they could rig an election....

A) Wouldn't they rig it every year?
B) How do you explain their not having a majority in the House
C) How do you explain a state like Indiana where it looks very good for Democrats in the Senate but will be a red state.
D) How do you explain Nevada which Obama won in 2012 but the GOP held on to it's Senate seat.
E) Why wouldn't they rig Texas? So far these Ninja Democrats have gotten away with rigging every election since the Interent came out...why not get 38 EV's. The penalty is the same whether you righ Iowa or Texas so why not rig Texas????

Do be a good boy and answer those questions.

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

They have to get their rationalization straight as to why Drumpf lost. First they say that liberals are too stupid now they claim all liberals are professional hackers.

That's kind of a stupid complaint. Any IT savvy person (that is a bunch of professionals and virtually any kid under the age of 14) knows it only takes one hacker to break into a data store and alter its contents. The majority of self identified liberals are not above average in intelligence.

Here's an IT reality. There is NO data repository connected in any way to the internet that is totally safe from breach. None. The best you can hope for is to make breaching it take long enough that a hacker will give up and attack an easier target.

If you really want to make electronic voting as secure as possible, print a paper receipt for the voter so he can go online later and verify that his recorded vote matches his receipt. It wouldn't stop fraud and wouldn't stop democrats from registering dead voters, but it would at least let a voter know that his vote was recorded accurately.

I disagree. All you need to do is route the date via VPN. The data is automatically encrypted and would take too long to decrypt in order to effect an election. That would also stop any man in the middle attacks as the session itself is encrypted. I agree we should have some sort of check but that wont work too well if someone decides to change their vote because they had second thoughts.

I agree with the immediate tallying that would take too long to hack. How about three non-partisan accounting firms all obtaining a copy of the e-ballots which can then be compared for mismatches and fraud? The vulnerability there is the early voting, which in some cases goes on for a month before the election. Once voting is done electronically, we could make a strong case that early voting be eliminated.

 

[Asclepias]

I think they are speaking more to the point that the voting data is unencrypted in most places and there is a potential for being hacked and altered.

If that were to happen, they'd blame the Democrats first and often. So what does it matter? Why not hack the returns from Texas?

They have to get their rationalization straight as to why Drumpf lost. First they say that liberals are too stupid now they claim all liberals are professional hackers.

That's kind of a stupid complaint. Any IT savvy person (that is a bunch of professionals and virtually any kid under the age of 14) knows it only takes one hacker to break into a data store and alter its contents. The majority of self identified liberals are not above average in intelligence.

Here's an IT reality. There is NO data repository connected in any way to the internet that is totally safe from breach. None. The best you can hope for is to make breaching it take long enough that a hacker will give up and attack an easier target.

If you really want to make electronic voting as secure as possible, print a paper receipt for the voter so he can go online later and verify that his recorded vote matches his receipt. It wouldn't stop fraud and wouldn't stop democrats from registering dead voters, but it would at least let a voter know that his vote was recorded accurately.

I disagree. All you need to do is route the date via VPN. The data is automatically encrypted and would take too long to decrypt in order to effect an election. That would also stop any man in the middle attacks as the session itself is encrypted. I agree we should have some sort of check but that wont work too well if someone decides to change their vote because they had second thoughts.

I agree with the immediate tallying that would take too long to hack. How about three non-partisan accounting firms all obtaining a copy of the e-ballots which can then be compared for mismatches and fraud? The vulnerability there is the early voting, which in some cases goes on for a month before the election. Once voting is done electronically, we could make a strong case that early voting be eliminated.

The same goes for registering dead voters. It should be relatively easy for there to be a check against the SSN Administrations records that would disallow an attempt to register someone that was already dead.