RE: Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked

["David Hayden" <dahayden () clubhayden com>]

It is not a statistical deviation when compared to the two previous
elections in the same areas. The article simply wrote that off as
probable fraud then too. Hardly objectivism nor computer news worthy. It
also neglected to mention when quoting Dick Morris that the exit poll
sampling of women was way higher than actual turn out, which is why the
exit polls were abandoned as inaccurate... And Dick Morris was the first
one to abandon them. Just as the exit polls were abandoned in 2000 for
the same reason. Unlike phone polling which can verify the demographics
of where it is calling, exit polls are historically not accurate.

Three elections in a row (2000, 2002, & 2004) show those counties voting
in the proportions they did. Computer fraud would require that each
county have a hacker, that these hackers had access to the final numbers
for 3 elections in a row, and that they were able to use similar
proportions each time.

I know a lot of Dems that voted Republican this year, even some in
Florida. They are not a statistical anomaly IMO. Nor is it computer news
worthy. What would be though is to talk about how online vote
registration by groups like Moveon.org caused several counties in Ohio
to have more registered voters than actual people. That was verified
before the election but there was nothing Ohio could do about it because
of how we count votes anonymously. That kind of high tech fraud is
something that needs to be addressed either by different voter
verification (a utility bill can be used where I am from regardless of
the date stamp) or by not being anonymous. Losing anonymity is not
likely so we need to tighten down on the high-tech ways we have of
verifying peoples identity before they are allowed to register to vote.

The article had two overall points. 
1. People can't possibly have been that Republican for 3 votes in a row
2. Windows can't possibly be seen as the correct place to put votes

Both subjective. Neither computer news worthy IMO. High-tech voter
registration fraud is the bigger story and was unfortunately ignored.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Atom 'Smasher' [mailto:atom () suspicious org] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 12:54 AM
To: Jay D. Dyson
Cc: Bugtraq
Subject: Re: Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Jay D. Dyson wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Atom 'Smasher' wrote:
>
> > Evidence Mounts that the Vote Was Hacked
>
>       Read the whole thing and didn't see any evidence.  Just wild 
> speculation and baseless conjecture.  Hell, there were countless 
> counties across the nation in which more people were registered to 
> vote than were eligible residents, but -- for some reason -- that
ain't news.
>       Why was this politically-motivated nonsense approved for
Bugtraq? 
> The Democrats lost.  Get over it already.
====================

there is a statistically significant deviation that correlates to
particular equipment: this *IS* a technology and security issue *NOT* a
political issue (although there are certainly political implications).

i've gotten quite a bit of hate mail over this, but if there were
allegations that the vote was hacked in favor of kerry (hypothetically,
let's say in a state where kerry's brother were governor) i'm sure there
would be quite a bit of interest among those who now claim that this is
irrelevant, off topic, sore losers, etc.

the issue really is bigger than who won or lost... it's about how the
game is played. as computer security professionals we owe it to
ourselves to take this sort of allegation very seriously *regardless* of
what candidate we prefer.


- -- 
         ...atom

  _________________________________________
  PGP key - http://atom.smasher.org/pgp.txt
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

        "Never forget that everything Hitler did
         in Germany was legal."
                -- Martin Luther King, Jr
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: What is this gibberish?
Comment: http://atom.smasher.org/links/#digital_signatures

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJBka0QAAoJEAx/d+cTpVci67kIALzMmPEhLAxg4biiQtkX8Yx/
0bbaPdDwGfpABQtugS1ImqaCUuTziNlOV36jxFSyrvYwuOcSWyY7vUOOFty4/1SU
NcxgxHmo4I877x7c1TwtqRKjaiQ8JGO6DGoRtinxgbkavA388Tl+dUlENinWiNbL
hUMEqr9NOkWiFGvLRwXaXDn1ObwIHFjVaMJqndGZMKWd10nUTMVttr0+sQfPGH6L
liykIOzDMklXBk1qs6fhpjeZfYAuLmhOzGBZwCPqDlTCC4wYeDsX40wWBAREl5uE
CUA6g3bzp5GtL1P5E9Km20l6sazrbOYU23yvXyDnUmQ54CC+3fNu3SkNxXmv0/U=
=C16d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----