• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Hillary Clinton, "presented" with "signs" of "vote hacking", "is mulling" recounts.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

perfectchaos007

Member
Hilary Clinton said in the debate she was horrified when Trump insinuated he may protest the results of the election if it didn't go his way. This is the type of investigation Trump would have done if he lost.
 
M

Ms.Galaxy

Member
MrS said:
Let it go
Click to expand...

I'd sooner die with a rifle in my hand and the country completely divided should this election be overturned and Clinton won leading to civil war than letting fascism win and influence the entire world.

If there's even a hint that there might be something off about the election results, I say investigate. And should those results end up with Clinton winning enough electoral votes, then thank god for that. If not, then I'm ready for the coming war.
 
N

Neoweee

Member
perfectchaos007 said:
Hilary Clinton said in the debate she was horrified when Trump insinuated he may protest the results of the election if it didn't go his way. This is the type of investigation Trump would have done if he lost.
Click to expand...

This is way too peaceful. Trump would be bitching to high heaven on Twitter and borderline inciting violence.
 
I

Intheflorsh

Banned
We hope to do recounts in all three states. If we only raise sufficient money for two, we will demand recounts in two states. If we only raise enough money for one, we will demand a recount in one state. If we do not raise enough for any recount (which is highly unlikely) we pledge to use the money for election integrity efforts and to promote systemic voting system reform.
Click to expand...

So basically this is just a way for them to get a couple hundred thousand bucks to throw around since obviously they won't get enough for all three states.
 
Yoda

Yoda

Member
Given that they don't have actual evidence of hacking, the fact that the transition is well under way, and there are only a few days left to start the process; I don't see this happening.
 
S

soco

Member
wtf. these are labeled as donations, so if they don't reach the 2.5 million (or even if they do) can't jill stein just keep the money?
 
D

digdug2k

Member
perfectchaos007 said:
Hilary Clinton said in the debate she was horrified when Trump insinuated he may protest the results of the election if it didn't go his way. This is the type of investigation Trump would have done if he lost.
Click to expand...
But he won. His tactics work. Democrats would be idiots not to use the same tactics now. They work.
 
N

Neoweee

Member
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/demographics-not-hacking-explain-the-election-results/

"Even if the borderline significant result for Wisconsin didn’t vanish when weighting by population, it would be doubtful, for a few reasons. You’re more likely to find a significant result when you make multiple tests, as we did by looking at eight states with and without weighting by population.9 Also, different places in Wisconsin and Texas use different kinds of voting machines; presumably if someone really did figure out how to hack certain machines, we’d see different results depending on which type of machines were used in a county, but we don’t. And Nate Cohn of The New York Times found that when he added another control variable to race and education — density of the population — the effect of paper ballots vanished."
 
B

broncobuster

Banned
perfectchaos007 said:
Hilary Clinton said in the debate she was horrified when Trump insinuated he may protest the results of the election if it didn't go his way. This is the type of investigation Trump would have done if he lost.
Click to expand...

And she conceded. Right now we have this group trying to convince them to investigate and inexplicably Jill Stein crowdfunding a recount.
 
R

robochimp

Member
perfectchaos007 said:
Hilary Clinton said in the debate she was horrified when Trump insinuated he may protest the results of the election if it didn't go his way. This is the type of investigation Trump would have done if he lost.
Click to expand...

He was also talking about 2nd amendment solutions, she was rightly horrified.
 
Damerman

Damerman

Member
If you look at who donald trump is appointing to run our country, this is not just a simple L... this will have very deep and grave ramifications.
 
Theonik

Theonik

Member
You Are Viewtiful said:
Well, if you were arguing the merits of electronic vs. paper voting all along, then I agree with you: paper is superior for integrity reasons. But if you're talking about this particular instance, there is no clear discrepancy between counties that used paper ballots and ones that used electronic voting.
Click to expand...
Well there is a discrepancy but it can be explained in other means. That doesn't really mean anything but neither does the evidence presented. If votes could reliably be extrapolated like this then there would be no need to have elections at all!

The posts I was replying to, was about whether this kind of fraud would hypothetically be practical and hard to detect which it absolutely would be.

The problem is however, that the only way to get hard evidence would be a re-count and forensic analysis of the suspected 'faulty' devices. And the later isn't guaranteed to show tampering either. This is a huge problem.

Joni said:
It would be incredibly scary if this turned out to be true, especially as it is not actually clear how this would be resolved.
And it would be bad for electronic voting, which should be the future.
Click to expand...
Electronic voting makes sense on paper but only if you consider its advantages and not its disadvantages. The potential for high-scale tampering is too great and not currently solved. We've literally had centuries to perfect paper ballots after investigating and uncovering the most ridiculous types of fraud.

The fact people today are flat out refusing to dispute voting is kinda baffling and disheartening to me. The system works not because of trust, but transparency coming from mistrust. This is where electronic voting falls flat as it introduces a black box into the equation and for all its benefits and novelty, trust has no place in an election.
 
T

TwEE-N-Toast

Banned
Ms.Galaxy said:
I'd sooner die with a rifle in my hand and the country completely divided should this election be overturned and Clinton won leading to civil war than letting fascism win and influence the entire world.

If there's even a hint that there might be something off about the election results, I say investigate. And should those results end up with Clinton winning enough electoral votes, then thank god for that. If not, then I'm ready for the coming war.
Click to expand...

Right on brother much respect. Wipe the Doritos from your fingers and get mom to stock up on the chicken tendies first though.
 
B

brian577

Banned
Ms.Galaxy said:
I'd sooner die with a rifle in my hand and the country completely divided should this election be overturned and Clinton won leading to civil war than letting fascism win and influence the entire world.

If there's even a hint that there might be something off about the election results, I say investigate. And should those results end up with Clinton winning enough electoral votes, then thank god for that. If not, then I'm ready for the coming war.
Click to expand...

You can take your rifle. I'll put a bullet in my head before I live through that kind of hell. You have no idea what you're asking for.
 
J

Joe

Member
J. Alex Halderman, cyber security expert cited in the article, has posted this:

Want to Know if the Election was Hacked? Look at the Ballots
You may have read at NYMag that I’ve been in discussions with the Clinton campaign about whether it might wish to seek recounts in critical states. That article, which includes somebody else’s description of my views, incorrectly describes the reasons manually checking ballots is an essential security safeguard (and includes some incorrect numbers, to boot). Let me set the record straight about what I and other leading election security experts have actually been saying to the campaign and everyone else who’s willing to listen.
Click to expand...
Could anyone be brazen enough to try such an attack? A few years ago, I might have said that sounds like science fiction, but 2016 has seen unprecedented cyberattacks aimed at interfering with the election. This summer, attackers broke into the email system of the Democratic National Committee and, separately, into the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, and leaked private messages. Attackers infiltrated the voter registration systems of two states, Illinois and Arizona, and stole voter data. And there’s evidence that hackers attempted to breach election offices in several other states.

In all these cases, Federal agencies publicly asserted that senior officials in the Russian government commissioned these attacks. Russia has sophisticated cyber-offensive capabilities, and has shown a willingness to use them to hack elections. In 2014, during the presidential election in Ukraine, attackers linked to Russia sabotaged the country’s vote-counting infrastructure and, according to published reports, Ukrainian officials succeeded only at the last minute in defusing vote-stealing malware that was primed to cause the wrong winner to be announced. Russia is not the only country with the ability to pull off such an attack on American systems — most of the world’s military powers now have sophisticated cyberwarfare capabilities.
Click to expand...
Could anyone be brazen enough to try such an attack? A few years ago, I might have said that sounds like science fiction, but 2016 has seen unprecedented cyberattacks aimed at interfering with the election. This summer, attackers broke into the email system of the Democratic National Committee and, separately, into the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, and leaked private messages. Attackers infiltrated the voter registration systems of two states, Illinois and Arizona, and stole voter data. And there’s evidence that hackers attempted to breach election offices in several other states.

In all these cases, Federal agencies publicly asserted that senior officials in the Russian government commissioned these attacks. Russia has sophisticated cyber-offensive capabilities, and has shown a willingness to use them to hack elections. In 2014, during the presidential election in Ukraine, attackers linked to Russia sabotaged the country’s vote-counting infrastructure and, according to published reports, Ukrainian officials succeeded only at the last minute in defusing vote-stealing malware that was primed to cause the wrong winner to be announced. Russia is not the only country with the ability to pull off such an attack on American systems — most of the world’s military powers now have sophisticated cyberwarfare capabilities.
Click to expand...
America’s voting machines have serious cybersecurity problems. That isn’t news. It’s been documented beyond any doubt over the last decade in numerous peer-reviewed papers and state-sponsored studies by me and by other computer security experts. We’ve been pointing out for years that voting machines are computers, and they have reprogrammable software, so if attackers can modify that software by infecting the machines with malware, they can cause the machines to give any answer whatsoever. I’ve demonstrated this in the laboratory with real voting machines — in just a few seconds, anyone can install vote-stealing malware on those machines that silently alters the electronic records of every vote.

It doesn’t matter whether the voting machines are connected to the Internet. Shortly before each election, poll workers copy the ballot design from a regular desktop computer in a government office, and use removable media (like the memory card from a digital camera) to load the ballot onto each machine. That initial computer is almost certainly not well secured, and if an attacker infects it, vote-stealing malware can hitch a ride to every voting machine in the area. There’s no question that this is possible for technically sophisticated attackers. (If my Ph.D. students and I were criminals, I’m sure we could pull it off.) If anyone reasonably skilled is sufficiently motivated and willing to face the risk of getting caught, it’s happened already.
Click to expand...
There’s just one problem, and it might come as a surprise even to many security experts: no state is planning to actually check the paper in a way that would reliably detect that the computer-based outcome was wrong. About half the states have no laws that require a manual examination of paper ballots, and most other states perform only superficial spot checks. If nobody looks at the paper, it might as well not be there. A clever attacker would exploit this.
Click to expand...
Examining the physical evidence in these states — even if it finds nothing amiss — will help allay doubt and give voters justified confidence that the results are accurate. It will also set a precedent for routinely examining paper ballots, which will provide an important deterrent against cyberattacks on future elections. Recounting the ballots now can only lead to strengthened electoral integrity, but the window for candidates to act is closing fast.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
F

Frankfurter

Member
Joe said:
J. Alex Halderman, cyber security expert cited in the article, has posted this:

Want to Know if the Election was Hacked? Look at the Ballots
Click to expand...


I'm wondering what the incentive for using voting machines is. Apparently it's not exactly improving the time to count (California is still not done...) and now it's not even safe either? Who is the manufacturer of these devices and who makes sure that the manufacturer or its employees produce these devices without some kind of "hack" installed?
 
J

jfkgoblue

Member
Frankfurter said:
I'm wondering what the incentive for using voting machines is. Apparently it's not exactly improving the time to count (California is still not done...) and now it's not even safe either? Who is the manufacturer of these devices and who makes sure that the manufacturer or its employees produce these devices without some kind of "hack" installed?
Click to expand...
Its perfectly safe. He is saying that there may have been a massive Russian spy network plant programs on all the voting machines... AKA fucking nothing.

And he made no mention of Michigan not having voting machines.
 
M

Ms.Galaxy

Member
TwEE-N-Toast said:
Right on brother much respect. Wipe the Doritos from your fingers and get mom to stock up on the chicken tendies first though.
Click to expand...

Ha ha ha... I'm not joking... Also, I'm a trans rights activist who has done on foot protests, organization, volunteered for the Democratic Party, and aided multiple transgender people seeking assistance on where to start. If you're saying I'm some sort of lazy keyboard warrior, I actually put in the fucking effort to fight what I believe in.

Also, my mother is a complete devastating mess who's been panicking and crying since Trump was elected, along with the rest of my family who's moving back to Portugal because of said election. Very funny...

brian577 said:
You can take your rifle. I'll put a bullet in my head before I live through that kind of hell. You have no idea what you're asking for.
Click to expand...

I already went through hell in my life; kidnapping, torture, rape, abuse, near death, and oh so much more. I come from a family who suffered from a fascist state, some of which died under said state just for holding liberal and socialist ideologies. Yes, I know what I'm asking for, I know the complete consequences of what I'm asking for, but I rather die fighting then letting the world succumb to fascism.
 
Charles Brandon

Charles Brandon

Member
If that article is correct then, yeah, you should have recounts. If only to set aside any doubt.

If it turns out that the machines were rigged though...things are going to get very bad, very quickly on a number of levels.
 
Theonik

Theonik

Member
Frankfurter said:
I'm wondering what the incentive for using voting machines is. Apparently it's not exactly improving the time to count (California is still not done...) and now it's not even safe either? Who is the manufacturer of these devices and who makes sure that the manufacturer or its employees produce these devices without some kind of "hack" installed?
Click to expand...
In theory every device manufacturer needs to adhere to protocol and auditing in accordance to the requirements for acquisition contracts each government has. Whether processes are sufficient, are adhered to, and/or are consistent in each state and voting district is a whole can of worms. State laws will usually allow either candidate to inspect the machines to ensure there is no tampering, but in practice that is only part of the puzzle and compromise can happen either after that takes place or be undetected.

As for the benefits, speed and potential decrease in cost are the main cited ones. There is also this idea of eliminating human error and bias but in reality machines are even harder to trust in this case. There is also the cynical view I suppose that the people who ask for these systems to be implemented are looking to exploit them but that's tinfoil hat territory.

jfkgoblue said:
Its perfectly safe. He is saying that there may have been a massive Russian spy network plant programs on all the voting machines... AKA fucking nothing.

And he made no mention of Michigan not having voting machines.
Click to expand...
This is not what he's saying and anyone with any security expertise whatsoever will tell you the same story. The risk of attack from a sufficiently well resourced entity is alarming. There is no need for a massive spy network whatsoever. Just look at the Snowden leaks and stuxnet about how it is possible to infect air-gapped systems by exploiting their operators without their knowing, and that only scratches the surface of what can be achieved in practice.

There is no hard evidence that tampering happened but there will never be any unless serious forensic investigation happens. It's absolutely worth looking into.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Russia Recruited YouTubers to bash "racist b*tch" Hillary Clinton
2
69
11K
Hamster Plugin replied
  • Locked
2 in 10 Clinton Primary Voters Weren't Going To Vote For Obama (2008 Flashback)
16
4K
ModBot replied
CNN: Russian-linked Facebook ads targeted Michigan and Wisconsin
48
7K
Smellycat replied
  • Locked
1 In 10 Sanders Primary Voters Ended Up Supporting Trump
7 8 9 10 11
524
48K
Ekai replied
  • Locked
Jill Stein Launches Fundraising Effort To Ask For A Recount In 3 States
16 17 18 19 20
961
118K
FyreWulff replied
Top Bottom