Re: A Diebold network connection Question

From: Jim March <jmarch_at_prodigy_dot_net>
Date: Thu Aug 18 2005 - 15:48:30 CDT

Ron Crane wrote:

> I am well aware of the archives of this forum. I am also aware that
> some officers of OVC do not consider the threats posed by
> firmware-based malware loaders to be important, and do not advocate
> rigorous hardware inspections. "COTS" is the usual answer, and it is
> insufficient, since a vendor secretly can install whatever firmware it
> wishes in "COTS" hardware -- firmware that cannot be detected without
> rigorous hardware inspections, such as Nevada's Gaming Control Board
> enforces for electronic slots. Further, nothing in the "archives"
> satisfactorily addresses e-voting's transparency shortcomings, VVPB
> notwithstanding.
>
> -R

Hari Hursti pointed out an example of firmware being subverted to
manipulate one specific application: a few years ago various video card
makers were caught rigging firmware to specifically look for the PC Labs
(magazine) graphics benchmark and act weird but fast only when it was
running.

I think that's a valid "proof of concept" that some hardware
manufacturer might be subverted into doing for voting systems...

Jim
_______________________________________________
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 Wed Aug 31 23:17:28 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 11:44:12 CDT