Wednesday, October 23, 2002


This will be the first time with more than one entry per day, but I couldn't pass this by.

Now they are worried about computerized voting machines being "hacked".

Of course, "hacking" is a subjective term - often misused, as the case here. But lets go along with their little fantasy.

Let's assume that the Democratic Party finds some people with brains to run the elections in those Florida counties that had all those voting problems in the last two elections. They setup these computerized voting booths, that are for some reason attached to the public Internet. Why they would be instead of on an isolated private network, I don't know. The idea that our "hackers" have about 14 hours (7AM to 9PM - 'court' ordered extended voting hours, like in St. Louis) to learn a whole new system, find all its weaknesses, break into the systems and change the data, erase logs, and disconnect before anyone discovered them is truly fiction. Even though I would like to try to break into a system in less than 60 seconds and write a worm that does all this while getting a hummer from a babe who performed fellatio "full-service" (I'll pass on the gun to the head) like in 'Swordfish' - it ain't gonna happen.

Besides, how many people could possibly successfully pull off the above scenario compared to the number of people (no matter their technology skill level) who could pilfer a stack of butterfly ballots, punch some holes in them, and drop them in the ballot box when no one is looking? You tell me which fraud is easier.

As far as a missing 'paper trail' goes, haven't these people heard of PRINTERS?