[ale] hack challenge for electronic [v]oting system

[Irv Mullins]

On Saturday 23 August 2003 04:37 pm, Jeff Hubbs wrote:

> The hack would be judged more successful ("extra credit") if: 1) the
> hack could go totally undetected 2) the hack could produce an
> arbitrarily chosen result (i.e., make a certain candidate win or, in the
> extreme case, "dial in" an arbitrarily chosen numerical result).

The sad part of this whole discussion is that anyone who has even a little 
familiarity with computers can readily see how voting results could be skewed
by any entity involved in making or maintaining those machines.

Yet our policians can't see it.

Or can they?

Irv







_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale