| Author | Message | ||
     Idle_yzag Megastar Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 26841 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.144.187 Rating: N/A |
 BJP valla tho disco dance aa? RahulGandhi/JP/Chiru | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4695 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
enti 2 months mundu decide autunda? Maha aithe district ki decide autundi, constituency ki 2 months scene ledu anukunta. Aina order decide kakunda evadu em peekaledu.
Physical access lekunda, EVM open cheyakunda, impossible. period.
Intha easy gaa collector ni manipulate cheyachu ante, emundi, ballot box ni mayam chesi, kotha ballot box, with new votes pedatharu. EVM system ni hack chesi, kotha chip petti, seal chesi ee gola enduku, ballot paper ni, ballot box ni duplicate cheyalera. 5-6hrs lo 300+ EVMs ni tamper chesi, reseal cheyachu, under high security anukunte nee istam. Inka India ni evadu kapadaledu. Collector ni, security ni bribe cheyachu ante EVMs yem kharma, emunna manipulate cheyachu. Akkada problem EVM kaadu, corruption. Adey nenu mothukunedi. Annai I had enough of this. You can believe what ever you want. | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16589 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
btw .. oka particular constituency ki oka particular set of machines (EVMs) velthayi ani .. almost 2 months mundu decide avutundi state level lo .. nominations process atleast 15 days mundu complete avutundi .. aalochinchuko enta time undo manipulation ki .. 10 days chaalava manipulation ki? "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16587 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
annai .. poll agents mundu enni votes poll chestaru? oka 25 varaku chestaru .. anthe kada .. they can infact program that .. all votes from serial number 100 - 500 go to particular party .. ala oka 300 machines meeda/leda 30 machines meeda cheste chaalu ..
see .. again .. u r only considering that there is only one hack method .. that Hari prasad displayed .. adi kakunda enno undachu .. thats the key here !
not at all .. ballot box/rigging method lo .. everything is public .. party reputation is at stake when it gets highlighted .. ade EVM aithe .. oka collector/oka engineer .. oka 5-6 hours in a strong room .. chaalu .. sadi chappudu kakunda pani jarigipotundi .. "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4690 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
3000+ lo 10% EVMs manipulate cheyali ante 300+ EVMs manipulate cheyali. 1. Order of candidates annadi not known well in advance. Nominations ye order lo accept chesaru annadi baitaki teliyadu. Deeniki aa official ni konali. 2. Taruvatha election date vache lopu 300+ EVMs manipulate cheyali. Deeniki entha mandini konali annadi teliyadu. Paiga poll agents mundu chese mock test lo teliyakunda manipulate cheyali. 3. Manipulate cheyadaniki EVMs anni baitiki techi, malli safe gaa migatha vatitho kalapali. With all seals in place. Intha conspiracy chese kante, ballot box lo donga vote, rigging chala easy anukunta. I think we had enough disc on this. You are free to believe that EVMs are safer than paper ballot. | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16584 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
constituency ki .. Lok Sabha aithe .. 3000+ EVMs untayi .. andulo 10% EVMs manipulate chesina .. results taaru maaru avutaayi? kaada? 10% .. officials mana vaallu aithe cheyyadam kastama? ilanti facility unte .. large scale cheyyanu kuda cheyyakarledu manipulations .. manaki elections are touch and go .. oka 20-30 seats lo ila choosukunte chaalu .. doubt rakunda toseyyachu .. asalu Chidambaram case ee teesuko .. classic adi .. May 16th night ki odipoyaadu annaru .. with some 3000 votes or something .. next day ki gelichaadu ani announce chesaru .. with some good 300 votes or something .. India lo .. anything is possible .. nuvvu annattu .. booth level lo randomized order of names ayithe .. oppukunta .. u cannot manipulate it so easily .. as you do it with constituency level now .. think and let me know .. "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4689 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
oh yes, tondarlo booth ani vesa. Order is the order in which nominations are accepted. Good enough kaada? | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16581 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
tappu .. only at a constituency level .. the order changes !!!! not at a booth level !!! "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4688 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
EVM ki defense system ki difference enti? Secrecy from general public is needed for a defense system. Same is with the EVM. kaada. Prati okkadiki lopala emundi, ela pani chestundi cheppeste inka safety ekkada untundi? The scrutinizing body here is the EC. EC lo prathi chota stooges unte BJP ki antha mandi MPs ela unnaru? How come non-Cong Govts are in power in so many states, even after Cong spending so much money. Election commission meeda nammakam lekunda elections lo poti cheyadam, rajakeeyallo undadaniki artham ledu. Denied to have a closer look at the system - Hari prasad asked for the code. It was proprietary. So they could not share it. Compelled to do enti mastaru. Hari Prasad put at risk crores of money that went into the design, and manufacturing these EVMs. He never considered any of the human checks the EC put in place to avoid fraud 1. EVM lo ye order lo symbols untayi annadi differs in every booth. 2. Ye EVM ye booth ki vellali anedi totally random. Ika stooges unnaru ante, ballot ni manipulate cheyadam chala easy. | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16576 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
see .. Hari Prasad was compelled to do it .. only because .. EC said .. u are only allowed to do this and hack .. u r not allowed to do this .. ecte ct .. btw .. even Defense systems are scrutinised (ofcourse not before public) .. but .. ippudu even IITs profs .. many many NGOs andaru doubts express chestunnaru .. simple .. EC, if it is sincere, in its words about boosting public acceptance of EVMs/election process and we have to see greater participation of public in democracy .. EVMs and more importantly, the election process has to be proved beyond doubt ! nenu Congress EVMs introduce chesindi etc etc ani analedu eppudu .. kaani with ruling India for 56 long years .. already govt machinery lo substantial number of stooges unnaru .. and ppl have doubts about whether the whole process is fair .. specific ga cheppalante .. it all started with Navin Chawla being CEC .. bcos .. his style of functioning gave people many doubts .. and mind you, he was the one who denied the experts to have a closer look at the EVM system ! alanti officers mottam system lo chaala mandi untaru kabatte .. ppl fear this all not fair .. when .. Bihar had fair elections in 2006 .. everybody felt happy that EC did a great job .. ippudaina anthe .. if EC can get it right .. I guess, ppl will throng booths again ! "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4687 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
Inkoti, idi edo Cong/Naveen Chawla kutra ani anukunte anthakante comedy ledu. EVMs vadali ani 1999 nundi implement chesaru, in phases. appati nundi EC commisioners M.S. Gill: 12 December 1996 to 13 June 2001 J.M. Lyngdoh: 14 June 2001 to 7 February 2004 T.S. Krishnamurthy: 8 February 2004 to 15 May 2005 B.B. Tandon: 16 May 2005 to 28 June 2006 N. Gopalaswami: 29 June 2006 to 20 April 2009 Navin Chawla: 21 April 2009 to 29 July 2010[4] [5] S.Y. Quraishi: 30 July 2010 onwards We know about the honesty of Gopalaswami etc. Aina unded 3 commissioners. Vallu andaru corrupt aithe inke, ballot box unna, inkedi unna result ni manipulate chestaru. And btw, I cannot verify it, but Hariprasad told police that the EVM has been provided to him by a Cong worker. EVM theft: Mumbai police record statement of Bachav PTI | 09:08 PM,Aug 31,2010 Mumbai, Aug 31 (PTI) The city police have recorded the statement of Congress party worker, Dinesh Bachav, after he was named by Hyderabad-based researcher Hari Prasad, accused of stealing a Electronic Voting Machine (EVM). Hari Prasad had told the police that Bachav and other social activists from Maharashtra had visited him in Hyderabad and asked him if he would be able to show how to tamper with an EVM if he was provided with one. "Based on this, we summoned Bachav and other activists to record their statement as to whether they had met Hari Prasad and the reason behind the visit," assistant police inspector Ravindra Wani said. According to Hari Prasad, he had received the EVM from Bachav and his wife Shobha Bachav, a former minister of state. "I have never met Hari Prasad. My husband (Dinesh) and few other activists had gone to Hyderabad to find out what this person was up to. All other allegations levelled by Hari Prasad are false," Shobha Bachav said. Hari Prasad, a technical coordinator of VETA (Citizens for Verifiability, Transparency and Accountability in Elections) was arrested on August 22, four months after he appeared on a local TV channel and demonstrated ways to tamper an EVM. He was booked under various sections of IPC for theft and trespassing. A local court on August 28 released him on bail. | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4686 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
Annai cheppinde malli cheptunna, EVM ni open chesi, nenu inko chip petti idi easy ante adi boothu ani. The key is access. Yes, EC should work hard to make sure that people are assured that EVMs are safe. EVM anedi Govt. property, something like a defense computer. Adi baitiki teesukochi dongatanam gaa, details anni reveal chestava? | ||
| Idle_yzag Megastar Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 26837 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.144.187 Rating: N/A |
idhi yentha L thanam ante inko EVM thayyaru chesthanu annatu vundhi, asalu EVM tho meeku problem yenti ante okka reason cheppatam ledhu, lol RahulGandhi/JP/Chiru | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4685 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
Annai EVM ni maaku ivvandi hack chesi choopistamu ante artham ledu. Yes I agree that we should have some independent teams check them periodically, or before every general election. That is why I say that his intentions are good. Kaani Govt. property ni illegal ga baitiki techi paper publish cheyadam thappu. For suppose, mana defense lo oka item ni baitiki techi hack chesi paper publish cheste oorukuntama? The main point is - the system is made robust when the EVM works hand in hand with human checks. For eg. software hack chesina, party symbols order jumble chesthe no body can make the result favorable to a party. Public lo EVMs meeda ye security checks teesukuntunnaru aney awareness penchali. Kaani EVM kottukochi robust kaadu ante anthakante boothu ledu. | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16567 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
http://www.chalanachithram.com/discus/messages/125/122033.ht ml?1283352921 aa thread lo .. Hari Prasad emi cheppado choodandi koddiga .. EC enduku bonkutondi explain cheyyandi .. "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16566 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
vaarini .. alaa ani .. when there are serious doubts on the functionings of EVMs .. dont you allow experts to check systems??? last 1 week lo .. TOI lo poll teesukunnadu .. do you trust EVMs ante .. 73% said NO .. (aa poll/numbers important kadu) .. whether are not people trust??? trust lenappudu demostrate EVMs in public and clear the doubts .. "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Indiarocks Side Hero Username: Indiarocks Post Number: 4684 Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.141.5.253 Rating: N/A |
saaru once for all gaa cheptunna, there is no system in the world that is absolutely fool proof. Aakhariki defense systems ni kooda access isthe hack cheyagala vallu unnaru. The key is protecting those systems from being accessed by people. Oka EVM ni dongathanam gaa teesukochi, andulo system ni marchesi, hack chesamu ante ela? Vjavasi anni cell phone tho marchachu antunnaru. Daniki 1. Mundu EVMs ni baitiki thevali. 2. Danilo display teesesi, bluetooth enabled display pettali. (one method demonstrated by Hari prasad group, in a lab outside India) 3. Next aa EVM ni teesukelli malli rest of EVMs lo kalapali. 4. Most importantly aa modified EVM exact gaa ye booth ki veltundi anedi teliyali. Inni telisthe cell phone tho modify cheyachu. Ippudu idi easy naa, India lo ballot box vaadi donga vote veyadam easy naa, ballot box lo ink poyadam easy naa, annadi mee vignatha ki vadilestunna. Can EVMs be made better - Yes Should the EC put in more checks - Yes Are EVMs more fool proof compared to Ballot in Inda - IMO Yes. EVM ni judge chesetappudu India lo unna current ballot system tho compare cheyali, taking into account all the measures taken by EC. Stand alone gaa EVM ni teesukochi hack chesamu ante, artham ledu. | ||
| Idle_yzag Megastar Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 26829 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.144.187 Rating: N/A |
nte yem cheyalli, ippudu vunna system lo hack cheydaniki chance ledhu, randomizing, names juggling, asalu ala yekkadina prove chesara? RahulGandhi/JP/Chiru | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16561 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
gud .. vere maatalu anni enduku .. make the EVMs fool proof .. antaku minchi evadiki EVMs tho problem ledu !!! "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Idle_yzag Megastar Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 26826 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.144.187 Rating: N/A |
edo vadinchali ani kakapothe kani, as a matter of testing, they can prepare few more machines and put them randomly and when some body vootes a printout comes and that slip he can put in ballot box and just for POC you can count both no one is denying that any computer can be hacked, we need to put system in place so that you cannot misuse... asalu meeru yendhuku oppose chesthunaru EVMs ni, okka reason ayna vundha? RahulGandhi/JP/Chiru | ||
| Kamal Hero Username: Kamal Post Number: 16558 Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 155.94.62.222 Rating: N/A |
EVMs adigithe ivvaru .. source code reveal cheyyaru .. kanisam nuvvevadiki vote esavo proof kuda undadu after that moment !!! "To be born free is an accident. To live free is a privilege. To die free is a responsibility" - Indian Army | ||
| Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 4481 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 192.127.94.7 Rating: N/A |
http://news.rediff.com/column/2010/sep/01/the-real-issue-wit h-electronic-voting-machines.htm I have been doubtful about electronic voting machines for quite some time, based on what one might call a healthy engineering scepticism. To put it bluntly, I don't trust computers. This comes from, at a point in the past, working with operating system innards and security. Since operating systems are the software that we implicitly trust to run most mission-critical systems, I have noticed that we are basically just one or two bugs away from disaster. Even though there are rules of thumb and safety factors in software development just as there are in other engineering disciplines, software is still an art, not a science. And even the more mature engineering areas, much closer to science, like civil engineering, are still not perfect -- the occasional bridge does collapse, albeit rarely. Therefore, the touching faith we repose in computers -- and this is especially true in India [ Images ] -- is misplaced. It would be a really bad idea to not have a backup mechanism that is not computer-based, especially when we are talking about embedded systems, the relatively primitive machines that run all sorts of devices such as refrigerators, microwaves, ATMs, etc. This, of course, was the rationale behind the famous Y2K panic, as people worried about whether planes would fall out of the sky as the result of an obscure software practice -- years were coded in two digits, not four (48, not 1948). Looked at from first principles, then, Electronic Voting Machines are inherently not the most reliable systems available. Nevertheless, they have indisputable advantages: for one, it is not possible to do physical 'booth-capturing'. Besides, votes are converted into digital impulses that can be manipulated easily, so that all sorts of things can be done with them -- counting can be lightning-fast; and statistical data collection, analysis, data mining, and so on can all be done with great facility. Unfortunately, that strength is also, ironically, the Achilles heel of the EVMs. Since there is no physical audit trail of the vote, once you have cast your vote, you cannot verify that your choice of candidate has been honoured. It is a relatively minor task for a software-savvy criminal to fix an election, with nobody being the wiser. I made a primitive demonstration of this sort of activity when I ran an Internet poll on my blog about who India's best prime minister was. 300 people voted, and there was a clear winner, and some others got very few votes. But I found that if I took the real results, and applied a simple algorithm to it: that is, such as diverting 1/3rd of each person's votes to a third candidate, I could at will have anybody 'win', even someone who got just one vote. And the pattern of votes 'gained' did not look particularly suspicious. Furthermore, in an eerie reminder of the way real electronic voting works, even after the poll 'closed' with 292 votes, it still accepted eight more votes. I have no idea how or why it did that, and since I do not have the source code, there is no way I could figure it out, either. That is another important problem -- unless third parties are able to verify beyond reasonable doubt that the system is trustworthy, in effect the system is completely untrustworthy. There is one major aspect -- the human factor. Related to it is a process issue -- what are the checks and balances to ensure that human error or malfeasance will not have catastrophic effects? In many critical systems, we have evolved elaborate fail-safe mechanisms that ensure it takes the co-operation of several individuals believed to be highly reliable. There are ways of vetting people to ensure that they deserve the highest level of trust -- this is the theory behind security clearances for access to sensitive information, and so we have people with top secret clearances whom we trust with extremely confidential information and the ability to perform critical acts. We have seen in innumerable Hollywood films (for instance The Hunt for Red October) how the order to launch American nuclear missiles from a submarine has to be authorised independently by two very competent people, who each carry one of the keys needed. If they do not agree, the missile is not launched. Even in a more mundane setting, the safe deposit box in India, typically a bank manager and the customer each has to insert their keys simultaneously for the locker to open. Thus, technical systems, human factors, and process issues need to work in perfect synchronicity for a complex system to work in ways that are provably correct. Now let us move from the abstract to the concrete. How do electronic voting machines work on some basic measures of correctness of technology, human factors and processes? The track record, alas, is not that great. In 2009, I did a survey of the literature: EVMs had been found severely wanting in case after case, and several counties have ceased to use them. I am sure there is more information since about a year ago, but here is an excerpt from my essay which was published in New Perspectives Monthly: United States (data from www.electionfraud2004.org and others as indicated): In April 2004, California banned 14,000 EVMs because the manufacturer (Diebold Election Systems) had installed uncertified software that had never been tested, and then lied to state officials about the machines. The machines were decertified and criminal prosecution initiated against the manufacturer. In the 2004 presidential elections, in Gahanna, Ohio, where only 638 votes were cast, George Bush [ Images ] received 4,258 votes to John Kerry's 260 A study by UC Berkeley's Quantitative Methods Research Team reported that irregularities associated with EVMs may have awarded 130,000-260,000 votes to Bush in Florida [ Images ] in 2004 There have been at least the following bills in the US legislature, all of which were the result of perceived problems with EVMs. (It is not known if any of them has passed; HR = House of Representatives, the lower house, and S = Senate, the upper house): HR 550: Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005 HR 774 and S 330: Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005 HR 939 and S 450: Count Every Vote Act of 2005 HR 533 and S 17: Voting Opportunity and Technology Enhancement Rights Act of 2005 HR 278: Know your Vote Counts Act of 2005 HR 5036: Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008 In 2006, a team of Princeton University computer scientists studied Diebold Election Systems EVMs, and concluded that it was insecure and could be "installed with vote-stealing software in under a minute", and that the machines could transmit viruses from one to another during normal pre- and post-election activity. Diebold, now Premier Election Systems, is the largest US manufacturer of EVMs In 2006, computer scientists from Stanford University, the University of Iowa and IBM suggested that Diebold had "included a 'back door' in its software, allowing anyone to change or modify the softwareÂ… A malicious individual with access to the voting machine could rig the software without being detected". Germany [ Images ] (2009) The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany declared EVMs unconstitutional. The Netherlands (2006) The ministry of the interior withdrew the licenses of 1187 voting machines because it was proven that one could eavesdrop on voting from up to 40 metres away. The suit was brought by a Dutch citizen's group named 'We Do Not Trust Voting Machines'. This group demonstrated that in five minutes they could hack into the machines with neither voters nor election officials being aware of it. Finland (2009) The Supreme Court declared invalid the results of a pilot electronic vote in three municipalities. United Kingdom (2007) The Open Rights Group declared it could not express confidence in the results for the areas that it observed. Their report cites "problems with the procurement, planning, management and implementation of the systems concerned." Ireland (2006) Ireland embarked on an ambitious e-voting scheme, but abandoned it due to public pressure Brazil [ Images ] (2006) There were serious discrepancies in the Diebold systems predominantly used in Brazil's 2006 elections. Watch out for part II tomorrow |
