Re: I need some help

From: JamBoi <jamboi_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 00:48:49 CDT

My point is that this Dr. Shamos looks to be either ignorant tool of
the DRE Cartel or trying to pull something (the tek info only serves to
underline and support that so it looks like you might not have caught
my point).

JamBoi

--- Ron Crane <voting@lastland.net> wrote:
> I am very familiar with realtime systems, having designed and
> implemented them for some years. My request does not go to the nature
>
> of such systems, nor to any questions about their language of
> implementation, nor to the silliness of the comparison between voting
>
> systems and flight control systems. My request is merely for a
> citation
> for the given proposition.
>
> By the way, nothing about Java prevents a vendor from writing a cheat
>
> ("Trojan Horse" or "trapdoor") into a system implemented using it.
> Java's security model is concerned with protecting items in the
> environment in which the Java VM runs (e.g. your files) from
> malicious
> Java apps downloaded from untrusted sources (e.g. the web). It is not
>
> concerned with protecting users of a Java program from code that
> computes its result (e.g. a tabulation of votes) differently from the
>
> manner in which it is advertised. The latter is much more important
> to
> voting system security than the former.
>
> -Ron
>
> On Apr 26, 2005, at 5:33 PM, JamBoi wrote:
>
> > One vital difference with flight control and elections is the
> nature of
> > flight control systems. Flight control system are what are called
> Real
> > Time (RT) systems with Real Time Operating Systems (RTOS). They
> must
> > be absolutely precise re: their timing. They are highly
> sophisticated
> > programs done frequently on a very low level of programming. Their
> > reliability is a matter of life and death. There are a few other
> > applications like medical, military and manufacturing that
> typically
> > are RT, but ELECTION SOFTWARE IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT ONE OF THEM.
> >
> > There is absolutely no need for nanosecond precision on a voting or
> > tabulating machine. The software could theoretically be written in
> > extremely high level languages with little problem unless the
> > performance becomes so slow that the user interface is compromised.
> > That is really the only contraint as far as timing goes, so there
> is
> > absolutley no need for an RT election system. As a matter of fact,
> > because of the difficulty of maintaining such software there are
> many
> > reasons you would NOT want to design an RT election system!
> >
> > This looks like an extremely ignorant argument to me. The only
> good
> > reason I can think of that someone who was knowledgable might make
> it
> > would be if they wanted to try to premptively disqualify Java or a
> > Java-like system from the running (since regular run of the mill
> Java
> > is not certifiable for RT systems although there are RT Java
> variants
> > out there). This might be done because Java is designed from the
> > ground up to not allow cracking the system. So if someone were
> wanting
> > to crack an election system they might not want a Java platform to
> be
> > used. Other than that it makes the person making the argument seem
> > quite out of touch IMO.
> >
> > JamBoi
> >
> > JamBoi
> >
> > "Live humbly, laugh often and love unconditionally" (anon)
> > http://dailyJam.blogspot.com

--- Ron Crane <voting@lastland.net> wrote:
> At Alan's request, I am writing a paper rebutting Prof. Shamos's
> recent
> paper that promotes DREs. I've got most of it in hand, but I need
> some
> help on three issues. Two of them should be easy for someone who
> knows,
> and one will require some work. I need all these by Thursday if
> possible. Here they are:
>
> 1. A few reliable cites for the proposition that flight-control
> software is subject to rigorous specification, implementation,
> review,
> and testing procedures.
>
> 2. A few reliable cites for the proposition that software used for
> major financial transactions (e.g. a bank's check-clearing system) is
>
> subject to tight standards (though probably not as tight as (1)).
>
> 3. I need someone who is well versed in OVC's system to read section
> 2.4 of Shamos's paper
> (http://euro.ecom.cmu.edu/people/faculty/mshamos/paper.htm#_edn1 )
> and
> to write a technically solid rebuttal. Reward: naming as a co-author.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Ron
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
> arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
>

JamBoi

"Live humbly, laugh often and love unconditionally" (anon)
http://dailyJam.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sat Apr 30 23:17:16 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 30 2005 - 23:17:22 CDT