[EL] Does the current recount effort meet the standards of the U of Michigan Computer Science Security expert

[John Shockley]

Dear Members:

The article about Professor J. Alex Halderman is below:

https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.9atvcvxmy

I don't know if just putting the ballots through the optical scanning
machines again to count the ballots, as most of Wisconsin is doing, would
detect the hacking.  Do any of you know, or has Halderman said so?  If the
malware was designed to disappear after the election, then it seems that
putting the ballots through the optical scanner three weeks later would
show different results.  I know that it is better is to physically count
the ballots, as Minnesota did in the Franken/Coleman contest.  That way you
can also count ballots the computer can't--if the circle is not filled in
completely, or if someone circles the circle instead of filling it in,
etc.  Counting those mistakes, where the intent of the voter is obvious,
makes for a more accurate count, but that is unrelated to the issue of
malware in the machines.

For the record, I believe Halderman said that it was unlikely the hacking
occurred, but possible, and that he and his Ph.D. students could design
such a hacking program.

John Shockley
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161202/36b0d0f7/attachment.html>