Discussion»Questions»Computers and the Internet» If hackers can break into the most secure computer systems what prevents them from hacking electronic voting machines and changing results?
If hackers can break into the most secure computer systems what prevents them from hacking electronic voting machines and changing results?
There was a TV show once that showed kids changing their grades by hacking the records. Is that fantasy or could it be? Hackers don't just break in to read what's there. They also have the power to CHANGE what's there don't they?
A couple of things. Different states use different systems so it's a little more difficult to stage an attack on all of them and trying to decide which system is the best to attack is a challenge for your intended result. The other big thing is, is that voting machines aren't connected to the internet or any online system so there really isn't any access.
For them to be compromised it would have to be by the people conducting the election or theoretically with a an external data source or computer on a chip kinda thing and somehow installed on the machine. Possible but unlikely someone would be able to open up a machine and install one without being noticed.
Thank you for a very thoughtful, helpful, informative and comforting reply Glis. I appreciate it . So the purported possible computer hacking in Wisconsin, if true, would have to have been done by insiders? What about the theory that is also being floated about possible Russian hacking to change results? Would they be limited to just reading what is there and be unable to change anything? Happy Monday. :)
This is the theory anyways. Personally I only put a limited amount of faith in it. They can still be manipulated, just not remotely. If the systems were compromised by Russian hackers it would have been to external systems and from them to the machines. If it did happen, the 0day or bugs were sitting on normal computers way in advance and put on the machines when they were hooked up to the other computers to program the candidates.
A few have shown how it can be done at the booth, but it was more a proof of concept and the groups who did exaggerated how easy it would be to get away with it. Which is common with bug hunters since it's a business. Still it is possible and might be worth an investigation if their are real signs of it, but honestly a lot of it sounds like a Hail Mary attempt IMHO.
I doubt that anything substantive will come from the recount. But Jill Stein raised money for it and I guess she has a right to have it done. I doubt that any election has ever been perfect/flawless. When you are dealing with machines that can go haywire or human beings who can make mistakes some things will be amiss. But on a massive scale..large enough to matter? I dunno. It would have to be something monumental to make any difference. Thank you for your additional comments and Happy Tuesday! :)
Hackers CAN'T break into a well fortified computer system. It's just that well fortified computer systems cost a lot of money. Consequently, hacking voting machines is fairly easy.
Even worse. But I thought ANY system was possible of being hacked. Hasn't the Pentagon been hacked? What would be more secure than that? Thank you for your reply m'dear. Do hackers leave tracks? Can computers that are hacked be unhacked and put back to normal?
Don't be fooled because its the PENTAGON, it's secure. It isn't. MOST systems aren't. That doesn't mean they CAN'T be secure. They CAN. But, it ain't CHEAP.
Lemme also comment on your conversation with Glis.. I dunno WHY it's so hard to believe that individuals, working in consort with some nefarious group, or even by themselves, CAN'T compromise each and every non-internet connected voting machine in a state.
Because you have to hack each and every one. Can be done, just not that easy to get access. Read my second reply to Rosie, this is the theory.
You say they can be secure. Only to a point, anything is crackable. No computer system is completely safe. Security doesn't really stop penetration, it just makes it more difficult and time cnsuming
Nahhh... In order to swing an election, you'd only have to hack a few. And, we agree, it's not easy, but doable. I think our enemy's are up to it, don't you?
excon
This post was edited by excon at November 28, 2016 8:20 AM MST
True, it would only take a few. Yet trying to predetermine where to strike for it to be reliably effective would be difficult and a dice roll. I'm sure plenty would like to and would if they could. If there is tangible evidence than it should be investigated for sure.
Glis is correct. As the Supervising Judge of two precincts hacking the machines is nearly impossible with 8 to 30 people watching the machines. Records are kept separate from the machine voting cards with respect to logging the machines total votes since built, opening vote count (which should be zero) and closing count. These are compared to the machine cards that contain the votes. Which are separated and secured by multiple people from the machines and removed from the site at close of voting.
Combined with thousands of precincts and people watching (people from all parties) the process. Changing the votes would be a monumental task.
The risk is in reporting the results. Even then all political parties are watching the results and verifying the results.
Can errors occur? Yes. Are they minor? Yes. Could they effect the outcome? not likely.
Yes.. There are layers, and layers and even more layers of protection.. So?
I've spent time in institutions with layers, and layers, and even more layers of security, specifically designed to PREVENT contraband from getting in. So?
Hi excon! You know how ignorant I am about stuff like this. I would like to think hacking on a massive scale is not possible but hasn't it already been done countless times? Doesn't the US have multiple foreign countries hacking us? Weren't WE caught red-handed hacking Israel at some point? Didn't Germany catch us hacking them? I mean if our " friends/allies" are hacking us as we are hacking them what's to stop our enemies from doing likewise? Fixing an election to insure that a "manipulatable chap" becomes prez would certainly be a worthy enterprise for any foreign country. Russia f'r instance. Can hacking leave no tracks? If so how would we ever know the truth? Thank you for your additional comments and Happy Tuesday! :)
The systems are not supposed to be connected to the Internet or any network. IF they are then yes they can be hacked. Assuming they are not connected to anything, the only way they can be hacked is internally by the software built into the machine. It could be done many ways: Make count every 10th vote for a particular candidate. Every X number of votes transfer so many to a chosen candidate After a specific vote combo comes (a weird combo like vote dem in ome race Rep in other and Green and Liberation in others) in transfer X amount of votes to candidate Y.
Any so many other ways. And many of these machines don't have a paper backup so I don't understand how they do an accurate recount.
Your reply isn't making me feel any better m2c. Not your fault. I know hacking goes on all the time among governments. They get caught/outed. We got caught/outed for hacking Israel for goodness sakes and also Germany at one point. They're our friends supposedly. I'm sure they hack us. Allies hack one another so wouldn't enemies have more to gain by doing so? It's scary. If hacking can be traceless then how would we ever know? Thank you for your reply and Happy Tuesday! :)
Benedict Arnold 