Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I mean, aside from the DNC's emails [2] [3] and gaining access to Arizona and Illinois voting records [1]. I'd personally put 1 to 4 odds against direct modification of voting numbers, given that voting machines are woefully insecure [4].

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-i...

[2] https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-11-03/inside...

[3] https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/26/us/2016-presidential-campaign...

[4] https://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-25/DEF%20CON%2025%20vot...



Voting machines are indeed woefully insecure - and has been for years - but accessing voter rolls doesn't do anything to it (but does a lot if you want to open a fake bank account or credit card, which is likely the motivation). Curiously, virtually nobody so seemingly concerned about voting security is advocating doing something about securing the actual machines or replacing them with more secure ones. Let alone taking more stringent measures on verifying the voter rolls, validating the voter's identity, etc. The argument immediately switches to "electoral fraud is insignificant and does not present enough threat to take measures that can lead to vote suppression". Which is fine, maybe the fraud is insignificant - but then probably the fraud done by hacking the machines - which is part of overall fraud, and probably one of the harder ways to pull it off - must be yet more insignificant? So is it a significant occurrence or not?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: