Home page logo

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Re: Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked
From: Paul Schmehl <pauls () utdallas edu>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:53:59 -0600

--On Thursday, November 11, 2004 02:22:18 PM -0500 Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

At least some of the machines used had active wireless on them

Do you know this for a fact? Can you identify the states/locations where this was implemented?

And how, pray tell, do you get "paranoid enough to watch access" to mean
*anything* when we allow the hacker *physical* *access* *AND* be
unsupervised due to the design of the polling booth?

What does physical access to the polling booth gain a "hacker"? They would need physical access to the tabulator that counts the individual votes, would they not?

You're going to have to get more specific about what it is you think was possible.

Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]