Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kaspersky Calls For Cyber Weapons Convention

Comments Filter:
  • Online voting (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:26AM (#40077543)

    Online voting is a single biggest threat to democracy. If 20 years from now "manual" voting will become obsolete, and only online voting remains, no one will be able to tell, whether the results are authentic or not. The one who pays most to the guys administering the DB server is going to be the winner. And everything will look legit, without any proof and without anything that inspectors could do about it.

  • by Hentes (2461350) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:26AM (#40077547)

    FUD was always good for the AV market.

  • Re:Online voting (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:28AM (#40077577) Journal

    And Kaspersky stands to earn a lot from security theatre should electronic voting be widely adopted.

  • by Kenja (541830) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:30AM (#40077609)
    Citizens United only effects the United States of America, which was never a democracy. We are, and always have been, a democratic republic.
  • Re:Online voting (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:33AM (#40077647)

    I usually hold Eugene in some high esteem, but this time he is dangerously wrong. Considering just how insecure the average user is and how likely it is that his machine is infected, online voting is one of the biggest threats to real democracy that we face today, right after voting machines.

    So far, infecting machines has only been a threat due to criminals wanting to infect those machines. Now, this by itself, is already dangerous. But it's minimal considering the possibilities for crooked regimes that like to put a democracy show on.

    Governments are already creating "government trojans". For reference, search for the infamous "Bundestrojaner" the Germans tried to put into place. So far, AV makers "may" at least find criminal trojans, but can we assume they still may if the trojans are made by the government? Can we see a crooked government create a trojan and infect the machines of their subjects with the express intention to manipulate the way they vote? Can we even see them making those trojans mandatory in the name of "security" (of course, without the stated intention of manipulating votes, but just to have a government backdoor "for security reasons")?

    And even if all of that is nothing but a crazy conspiracy theory, how likely would it be that some populist oppositions try to spin it and destabilize governments based on this "theory" and create doubt in the legitimacy of governments?

    Please, Eugene, reconsider.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:33AM (#40077649)

    Actually, that's what the US used to be. Now it's an oligarchic empire play-acting as a democratic republic.

  • by couchslug (175151) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @11:58AM (#40077925)

    If you give people financial support it doesn't make a fuck what you think you do or do not support.

    Your ACTION is support.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @12:13PM (#40078103)

    No.

    NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

    Mr. Kapersky obviously has no idea just how oppressive and invasive most governments are willing to be when enforcing WEAPONS laws. The American BATF is currently being investigated for a false-flag gun-smuggling conspiracy meant to justify a huge increase in their power and authority. Lots of European weapons regulatory agencies are even more ruthless.

    He does NOT want that camel's nose under the tent with anything having to do with programming or software development. There is nowhere for that to go but downwards.

  • Re:Online voting (Score:4, Insightful)

    by markkezner (1209776) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @12:35PM (#40078359)

    If you magically make the voting machines 100% secure, attackers will target the infrastructure that transmits, stores, and counts the votes.

  • by Ellis D. Tripp (755736) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @12:38PM (#40078389) Homepage

    And of course, we can always trust the MANUFACTURERS of ATM machines to be free from any political influence, as well, right?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold [wikipedia.org]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions [wikipedia.org]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walden_O'Dell [wikipedia.org]

  • by perpenso (1613749) on Tuesday May 22, 2012 @12:43PM (#40078463)

    ... want to be able to vote issues ...

    You intentions are good but I think the wisdom of the founding fathers wins on this point. Direct democracy voting on issues is not the panacea one might think. For example look at California and its propositions system, it is largely what you are asking for and some really bad/dumb stuff gets passed.

    The flaw in your plan, and a flaw the founding fathers presumably were expecting, is that direct democracy assumes a well informed electorate that seriously contemplates the issues and votes for the common good rather than self interest.

You don't have to know how the computer works, just how to work the computer.

Working...