That would be sloppy, there are better ways of doing it.
Once enough damage is done, or certain signal is not received, it deletes itself.
Easy to code and implement.
The NSA used to hack cables near cables they wanted to hack and eavesdrop using electrical interference from the cables being physically close to each other. I think they did that in the 90's. Better things now.
Hi, I am an analyst. Nothing is really lost. The digital fingerprint of code self deleting would remain. There would be data to demonstrate that something happened, i.e. a job was ran on the computer.
That said, I bet it's not that creative. If these numbers that are being presented are correct, then the code is not that sophisticated. There are so many better ways of voting manipulation and are less visible.
If I were tasked with this investigation I'd want to see the software code, and the hardware code. If I had to skew results, I'd have it done at the hardware level--this would be much easier to hide.
How hard would it be to get one of these boxes? How is it people steal ATM's all the time, but one of these voting machines never turns up on Craigslist?
Voting machines should be 100% open source and 100% disconnected from the internet at all times. The images should be hashed, and public so if any changes are made at the hardware or software level it's easily identified. Why some glowie company does it is beyond me. Why these cloak and daggers and illusion of security when there are more secure ways of doing it. It could be made to be more secure than paper voting. The only reason I can legitimately think of as to why it's not is due to fraud protection, as opposed to prevention. No reason for any of this nonsense in 2020.
Thats what worries me, you have a lot of "should" and "could" in your explanation. I don't trust what these people put together one bit, and have no clue how it works.
Even if the software was open source and publicly viewable, there is still a matter of the actual physical hardware engineering.
I really think this is done remotely, that's my hunch. Either through a purposeful back door, or through the HAMMER/SCORECARD scenario that has been floating.
An incremented number with no chain of authority is very easy to hack in countless ways.
Way too complicated on both sides, committing these election frauds and uncovering these election frauds, for us to say what's really happening.
I would have bomb disposal type forensics examine these machines themselves and see what physical defenses they have.
If the internals have sensors which are independently powered, that would be a sign these things are designed to "self-destruct" when being investigated. Before even getting down to the software level.
Software code is a joke. Who cares if they release a program if they have another one sitting on top that does something else to the outputs.
That would be sloppy, there are better ways of doing it.
Once enough damage is done, or certain signal is not received, it deletes itself.
Easy to code and implement.
The NSA used to hack cables near cables they wanted to hack and eavesdrop using electrical interference from the cables being physically close to each other. I think they did that in the 90's. Better things now.
So does that mean nothing could be done about this? This code talk is out of my league
Hi, I am an analyst. Nothing is really lost. The digital fingerprint of code self deleting would remain. There would be data to demonstrate that something happened, i.e. a job was ran on the computer.
That said, I bet it's not that creative. If these numbers that are being presented are correct, then the code is not that sophisticated. There are so many better ways of voting manipulation and are less visible.
If I were tasked with this investigation I'd want to see the software code, and the hardware code. If I had to skew results, I'd have it done at the hardware level--this would be much easier to hide.
How hard would it be to get one of these boxes? How is it people steal ATM's all the time, but one of these voting machines never turns up on Craigslist?
Voting machines should be 100% open source and 100% disconnected from the internet at all times. The images should be hashed, and public so if any changes are made at the hardware or software level it's easily identified. Why some glowie company does it is beyond me. Why these cloak and daggers and illusion of security when there are more secure ways of doing it. It could be made to be more secure than paper voting. The only reason I can legitimately think of as to why it's not is due to fraud protection, as opposed to prevention. No reason for any of this nonsense in 2020.
Thats what worries me, you have a lot of "should" and "could" in your explanation. I don't trust what these people put together one bit, and have no clue how it works.
I have a very good suspicion the good guys know how it works and are keen on places to check.
I'd volunteer my time to investigate the hardware if I could, but I'm sure there's a IT forensic team better than me on the case.
Even if the software was open source and publicly viewable, there is still a matter of the actual physical hardware engineering.
I really think this is done remotely, that's my hunch. Either through a purposeful back door, or through the HAMMER/SCORECARD scenario that has been floating.
An incremented number with no chain of authority is very easy to hack in countless ways.
Way too complicated on both sides, committing these election frauds and uncovering these election frauds, for us to say what's really happening.
I would have bomb disposal type forensics examine these machines themselves and see what physical defenses they have.
If the internals have sensors which are independently powered, that would be a sign these things are designed to "self-destruct" when being investigated. Before even getting down to the software level.
Software code is a joke. Who cares if they release a program if they have another one sitting on top that does something else to the outputs.
Dude same. I’m getting confused now
Seems like they could run it through the software while hand recounting. You could triangulate issues that way
Yes.
If the software has deleted any malicious code, then the results will be different than first pass. Thus indicating fraud.
If malicious code is present, it will give different results from the hand count.