Neil D Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 [:"blue"] Harris recruited computer expert Herbert Thompson, and on Feb. 14, 2005, in Tallahassee, Thompson met with Sancho and tried to crack the Diebold system remotely. The first attempt failed. On a second attempt, by directly accessing a computer where the votes are counted in a final tally, he manipulated returns. They used a local high school election for the experiment. In May, two more tests were held, this time with Hursti present. Using a device bought for about $200, he was able to easily alter the final vote by changing the program stored on the memory card. "You have to admit these systems are vulnerable and act accordingly," Hursti said. Diebold took a dim view of the experiments. On June 8, a senior company lawyer faxed Sancho: "You have willfully and intentionally allowed the manipulation of memory cards related to your elections. . . . We believe this to have been a very foolish and irresponsible act." The response frustrated Sancho. "More troubling than the test itself was the manner in which Diebold simply failed to respond to my concerns or the concerns of citizens who believe in American elections," he said. "I really think they're not engaged in this discussion of how to make elections safer." [/] Here is the rest of the story. This story keeps coming up for review by the public. Seems to me, if there are evidences of POSSIBLE tampering, shouldn't the american public demand a paper trail during the elections? Isn't that reasonable? True, it may not be cost effective, but isn't the will of the people the major concern? Shouldn't goverment be made to serve the people? Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. George Bernard Shaw
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.