
By November, Russian hackers could target voting machines - cjdulberger
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/27/by-november-russian-hackers-could-target-voting-machines/
======
zghst
Part of me doesn't like the whole red scare deal, but also, electronic voting
machines should be banned outright. You think that after the OPM scandal that
those things have the highest security??

~~~
alva
This Red Scare is getting ridiculous now.

One of the best things to come out of this election is how much political
strategy has been exposed to the general public, inc. media complicity. I have
so little faith in the political parties and media.

~~~
zghst
As do I. My stomach has been churning in disgust seeing the collusion big
money media and politicians. This latest attempt to drum up the Russian
boogeyman is incredibly laughable, especially since they laughed it off four
years ago. Yes Russia is corrupt, shitty regime, but they can't be culpable
for every U.S. politician's failures and dirty deeds (where the inverse
happens in the Russia), we've become so much like our so called "enemies",
obeying and apologizing to top party members, publishing stories that only
favor our dear leaders, etc.

~~~
andreiw
Russia is no more of a "corrupt shitty regime" than your own. So maybe, just
maybe, you should focus on constructive criticism of your own country instead
of offending others, hmmm? After more than 60 years of anti-Russian propaganda
I am not quite surprised that most Americans take every opportunity to jab at
or feel somehow morally or otherwise superior to Russia and Russians, yet you
would be surprised just how opposite and rather humane most Russians think of
Americans and the States... and not because of some God given right of
American righteousness and superiority, or some Russian inferiority complex.

So cut it with the anti-Russian nonsense.

~~~
zghst
America has better bread and circuses

~~~
ommunist
only for those with not expensive tastes

------
nxc18
The whole concept of electronic voting machines seems ridiculous to me. Not
only are they open to attacks at every level, there really isn't a significant
benefit to implementing them, beyond possibly saving some trees.

The peace of mind in trusting election results seems well worth the hassle of
paper.

The other big component that I think is missing from the debate over
electronic voting is the cost to communities. I loved voting (on paper) in the
2012 election, then staying up a few hours to tally the ballots with the
community. Voters came together to count the ballots together and deliver a
final count, which has the dual benefit of getting as many eyes on the process
as possible (less chance of fraud) and putting 'by the people' back into the
election process.

I've seen complaints that that isn't scalable, but I don't buy it. Any
community can be broken up into sub-groups that can cast their ballots locally
and work together to tally them, even if a group just covers a city block.

~~~
fryguy
One could argue that a properly implemented method of voting that involves
computers in some capacity would decrease the chance of fraud, and allow
voters to verify that their vote was counted. It could also allow more votes
to be counted because it could immediately tell them their vote was invalid
(how many hanging chads in Florida 2000?).

The problem is that we have companies like Diebold make this stuff. Companies
that want to make a buck and cover their asses rather than make something
secure and good for the people.

------
boneheadmed
" Even so, we have to accept that someone is attacking our nation’s computer
systems in an apparent attempt to influence a presidential election. "

This is so comical. If the DNC was actually acting in an ethical, responsible
and legal way, the email release would not influence the election one wit.
Instead it makes it even more clear that their apparatus had already chosen
the winner - and it wasn't Sanders.

On the other: Why even have computerized ballots? Back to paper. Not perfect,
but hacking problem solved.

------
memracom
If voting machines are that insecure, then you should be worried about Chinese
hackers, and Arab hackers and even American Republican hackers. Let's be
frank, voting machines that are insecure can be exploited by ANYBODY who cares
to influence an election and those with the most to gain/lose are
members/supporters of the parties whose candidates are standing for election.
In other words USA hackers should be your main worry. If you can secure the
voting systems against them, then you have a chance at a fair election.
Otherwise all bets are off and all the foreign hackers will be battling over
who controls the vote.

------
excalibur
We'll have 5 different organizations trying to rig the same election to
further their own agendas. Which group is the smartest? Whose manipulations
will carry the day? Find out next time on Who Wants to Screw a -19
Trillionaire!

------
elgabogringo
That's preposterous, don't you know the cold war is over?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1409sXBleg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1409sXBleg)

~~~
zghst
Smug, condescending, and dismissive are recurring traits in politicians who
eventually eat their words

~~~
elgabogringo
And remember when Hillary "pushed the reset button" with Russia - because (I
guess) relations with them were so bad under Bush - but her team screwed up
the translation? That was a classic:

[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7930047.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7930047.stm)

------
mikeash
When does this sort of thing become an act of war? It seems like "cyber" stuff
is taken much less seriously in that respect. Maybe it just gets more
attention.

------
eternalban
Not a problem. Let's use paper. (And dear Supreme Court, kindly stick to the
constitution this time.)

------
scigeek42
Obligatory XKCD reference: [https://xkcd.com/463/](https://xkcd.com/463/)

------
ommunist
They do not need to, since siloviki silently support Trump anyway.

