Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: Diebold Global Election Management System (GEMS) Backdoor Account Allows Authenticated Users to Modify Votes |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, 26 Sep 2004 12:14:24 -0500 |
On Thursday 23 September 2004 13:36 Polazzo Justin wrote:
It is impossible for a company to be non-partisan.
Perhaps. But that does not mean a company as an entity cannot be ethical and able to create a "non-partisan" voting system. The real question is not partisanship, it is trust. Who can The People trust to be ethical and create a fair voting system that is better than what has been used for decades if not centuries? I'm not so cynical that I believe no company could be trusted to create a non-partisan electronic voting system. Of course the trust should come with code review and oversight from groups selected by The People.
That is why it would be nice to develop an open source solution. That would be non-partisan. Having being created by democrats, republicans, anarchists, whoever wanted to contribute.
Why would open source necessarily be better? Who gets to decide what actually gets put in front of the voters? The "open source community"? The "non-partisan" EFF? This mailing list? As far as I know most states in the USA have some sort of an oversight committee for voting issues. Those groups will make the decisions. Arguing about it on the Bugtrag list is unlikely to produce any tangible results unless the various voting commission members follow Bugtraq. I'm not too sure this is topical for this list either since I doubt any people that make decisions about voting systems follow Bugtraq. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise on the latter point. Gene -- Linux era4.eracc.UUCP 2.4.22-28mdkenterprise i686 11:37:26 up 211 days, 5:39, 13 users, load average: 0.10, 0.04, 0.01 ERA Computer Consulting - http://www.eracc.com/ eCS, OS/2, Mandrake GNU/Linux, OpenServer & UnixWare resellers
| Previous by Date: | Re: New whitepaper "The Phishing Guide", Juraj Bednar |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Diebold Global Election Management System (GEMS) Backdoor Account Allows Authenticated Users to Modify Votes, Bruce Barnett |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Diebold Global Election Management System (GEMS) Backdoor Account Allows Authenticated Users to Modify Votes, Polazzo Justin |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Diebold Global Election Management System (GEMS) Backdoor Account Allows Authenticated Users to Modify Votes, Polazzo Justin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |