I don't know why you would ever trust a computer. They can work OK but if you wanted to subvert them that would work as well.
You can write programs that work only on certain days or at certain times, polling day, for instance. So they would pass every test in the preceding days but still rig the vote.
You can write programs that delete themselves after running so a follow-up audit would never find them.
The Chinese added some extra spying components to some SuperMicro server motherboards it made. You could alter the BIOS, the operating system, some subroutines etc.
Then there is interference across a network. The list goes on and if there was money in it then you can bet someone has done it.
If I wrote a program to run in Windows, say, would you also go through the Windows code line by line to see if what you thought was happening was actually happening?
I just looked on my PC and it has around 200 processes running. Ideally, they should all be checked line by line to be safe.
OK, but there is a problem. If I gave you a book in English and a thumb drive full of Chinese characters and told you they were the same, how would you check?
The source code would be text but the compiled and linked executable file would just be binary. Even worse, some of the binary that would run would not be in the source code anyway. It would be part of the operating system or drivers.
All valid points; I am not a coder but encrypting something to act only on election day wouldn't that be seen in auditing of the code? Of course that's with the assumption someone is looking.
Everything has to have a paper trail right (or evidence of its removal), hence no way around we caught them all.
The way they got around that in 2020 was doing an OTA update last-minute. And then ordered the wiping of the machines some point after the steal was done. Completely breaking protocol.
Their only line of defense was having their pals in the legacy media gaslight people into thinking that never happened.
Where would you get the code from? Suppose I gave you a printout with that part missing? Suppose the printout was several inches thick - you get about ten thousand lines of code to the inch in round terms - might you miss it? What if I didn't call the date "date". Even then, you would need to compile the code yourself to make sure that what you checked was what was actually running.
Also, USB rives are in use at polling stations. I might subvert the code that opens a USB drive to add in some code to the program that was hidden on that specific drive.
To cover every eventuality that a creative programmer might find you would need to have an extremely detailed forensic analysis of every machine and that would take more time than you saved by using the machines in the first place.
I believe he said the encryption keys are for election data, so anyone could decrypt the results data, make changes to vote totals, then encrypt the altered data to change the final results. Also they could change the tabulator settings to control how votes were counted, so there was no need to hack the Windows/BIOS code.
I don't know why you would ever trust a computer. They can work OK but if you wanted to subvert them that would work as well.
You can write programs that work only on certain days or at certain times, polling day, for instance. So they would pass every test in the preceding days but still rig the vote.
You can write programs that delete themselves after running so a follow-up audit would never find them.
The Chinese added some extra spying components to some SuperMicro server motherboards it made. You could alter the BIOS, the operating system, some subroutines etc.
Then there is interference across a network. The list goes on and if there was money in it then you can bet someone has done it.
Volkswagen raises hand…has advice on diesel emissions voting.
"Spare no expense on the environment."
Changing a single parameter in a piece of code even in a huge system can change it completely. All good programmers know this.
You are correct. In a full test, you read the code itself, comparing it to the specs of that the program was supposed to do.
Yes and no!
If I wrote a program to run in Windows, say, would you also go through the Windows code line by line to see if what you thought was happening was actually happening?
I just looked on my PC and it has around 200 processes running. Ideally, they should all be checked line by line to be safe.
The source code for the program you are auditing, yes.
OK, but there is a problem. If I gave you a book in English and a thumb drive full of Chinese characters and told you they were the same, how would you check?
The source code would be text but the compiled and linked executable file would just be binary. Even worse, some of the binary that would run would not be in the source code anyway. It would be part of the operating system or drivers.
All valid points; I am not a coder but encrypting something to act only on election day wouldn't that be seen in auditing of the code? Of course that's with the assumption someone is looking.
Everything has to have a paper trail right (or evidence of its removal), hence no way around we caught them all.
there is no paper trail if you dont count manually the votes you trust only rigged machines. They use lame conformist lazy people against us.
The way they got around that in 2020 was doing an OTA update last-minute. And then ordered the wiping of the machines some point after the steal was done. Completely breaking protocol.
Their only line of defense was having their pals in the legacy media gaslight people into thinking that never happened.
That depends.
Where would you get the code from? Suppose I gave you a printout with that part missing? Suppose the printout was several inches thick - you get about ten thousand lines of code to the inch in round terms - might you miss it? What if I didn't call the date "date". Even then, you would need to compile the code yourself to make sure that what you checked was what was actually running.
Also, USB rives are in use at polling stations. I might subvert the code that opens a USB drive to add in some code to the program that was hidden on that specific drive.
To cover every eventuality that a creative programmer might find you would need to have an extremely detailed forensic analysis of every machine and that would take more time than you saved by using the machines in the first place.
I believe he said the encryption keys are for election data, so anyone could decrypt the results data, make changes to vote totals, then encrypt the altered data to change the final results. Also they could change the tabulator settings to control how votes were counted, so there was no need to hack the Windows/BIOS code.
What board were you using??? I'm using X11SRA-F MB!!!