Oscar Plameras wrote: > What my Comelec check will do is, for 1000 votes inputted, I expected to get > in the results 1000 votes, categorized as valid, invalid, and uncategorized. > > And the actual results should match the expected results as prepared > by Comelec of 1000 votes, categorized as valid, invalid, and uncategorized. > > Your Comelec check is simple and straight to the point... but inadequate. In Disneyland, it might be acceptable though. I'm sure Comelec will be happy to have you aboard. > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Danny Ching <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You should check for absurdity in code, because it may not affect the check >> during testing but it may affect the outcome when it really counts (on >> election day). Why do you want to accept that risk? >> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Danny Ching <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> How about checking for code that says if there is a candidate named "Eddie >>> Gil" add 5,000,000 votes to Gloria? Will they check for each individual name >>> available in the world? >>> >>> Do not get me wrong. I do not believe that outcome checking is not good. >>> It is. What I am saying is that it is not enough. >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The check I propose is by Outcome. >>>> >>>> If my check will not catch the absurdity in any coding, that's well and >>>> good. >>>> >>>> My check is not going to look for such things. What matters are the >>>> outcome >>>> or results. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Robert Locke <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Oscar, >>>>> >>>>> If I had a closed system that did the following: >>>>> >>>>> if (current_date < '2010-05-10) { >>>>> do_a_normal_tally(); >>>>> } else { >>>>> do_something_slightly_different_but_not_too_obvious(); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> How would your proposed "Testing the System by Outcomes" catch this? >>>>> >>>>> Maybe you set the system date to be 2010-05-10, and the ruse is >>>>> revealed. >>>>> >>>>> So the programmer does this: >>>>> >>>>> if (current_date < '2010-05-10 && !obscure_hot_key_pressed) { >>>>> do_a_normal_tally(); >>>>> } else { >>>>> do_something_slightly_different_but_not_too_obvious(); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> How do you catch it then? Obviously this is an oversimplified >>>>> example, but I'm curious to hear how you would expose it. Or are we >>>>> supposed to blindly "trust" that this won't happen? If that's your >>>>> position, then I would say it's a bit naive. >>>>> >>>>> "There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an >>>>> advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as >>>>> against despots. What is it? Distrust." - Demosthenes >>>>> >>>>> Rob >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10 12, 09, at 9:35 PM, Oscar Plameras wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> We do it the way it has been done. >>>>>> >>>>>> Testing the System by Outcomes. >>>>>> >>>>>> Come up with a set of inputs, and a set of outputs. >>>>>> >>>>>> If all the outputs (maybe hundreds or thousands) agree with all the >>>>>> inputs, then that's acceptable. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:31 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> How do you suggest we ensure that the code that is running does not >>>>>>> have the badguyvote++ sub-routine? Checking binaries using pre- >>>>>>> defined test cases will probably miss something. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Sent via BlackBerry from Smart" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>>>>>> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:09:48 >>>>>>> To: <[email protected]>; Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) >>>>>>> Technical Discussion List<[email protected]> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election 2010 >>>>>>> SourceCode >>>>>>> Review) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's efficiency. Code source review will not get you to where you >>>>>>> want. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It will not reach the objective of knowing whether the System is >>>>>>> right >>>>>>> in doing what it's suppose to deliver. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is getting out of hand and really entertaining. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But seriously, what is wrong with a source code audit and a binary >>>>>>>> integrity validation mechanism? Just to check if there is not code >>>>>>>> that says: "if candidate='good guy' then badguyvote++"? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Sent via BlackBerry from Smart" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:58:59 >>>>>>>> To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion >>>>>>>> List<[email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election 2010 >>>>>>>> Source >>>>>>>> Code Review) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [email protected] is not even in google search. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Just another one of those pretenders. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe, just maybe your just one of those pretenders. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't understand. Why would you ask the question? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Daniel Escasa >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> OK, who are you, and what did you do with the Oscar Plameras who >>>>>>>>>>> posted this: >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.slug.org.au/archives/slug/2003/08/msg00344.html >>>>>>>>>>> and this: >>>>>>>>>>> http://archives.free.net.ph/message/20090918.004218.c213bcf2.en.html >>>>>>>>>>> ? Oh, and ironically, >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.elections.act.gov.au/elections/electronicvoting.html: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <except> >>>>>>>>>>> Source code for 2008 software (zipped file in .zip format - 759 >>>>>>>>>>> kb)The >>>>>>>>>>> eVACS® source code downloadable here is an extract of the >>>>>>>>>>> voting, data >>>>>>>>>>> entry, and counting modules as used by Elections ACT and is >>>>>>>>>>> provided >>>>>>>>>>> for study purposes only. Not included are: (a) artefacts produced >>>>>>>>>>> during the eVACS® development process, such as detailed design >>>>>>>>>>> specifications; (b) the base Linux operating system and >>>>>>>>>>> configuration >>>>>>>>>>> files; (c) the scripts that are used to initialise the vote >>>>>>>>>>> databases >>>>>>>>>>> and invoke the eVACS® modules. The design information for the >>>>>>>>>>> eVACS® >>>>>>>>>>> system is the property of Software Improvements Pty Ltd. Their >>>>>>>>>>> website >>>>>>>>>>> is at www.softimp.com.au/. Bona fide researchers interested in >>>>>>>>>>> acquiring more of the source code may apply to Software >>>>>>>>>>> Improvements >>>>>>>>>>> using the form at: www.softimp.com.au/evacs/contactus.html >>>>>>>>>>> </excerpt> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ironic because you're in Australia. And you're even too lazy to >>>>>>>>>>> trim >>>>>>>>>>> the quotes. And if you have to ask what that's all about, I'll >>>>>>>>>>> ask >>>>>>>>>>> again: who are you and what did you do to the Oscan Plameras who >>>>>>>>>>> posted those two messages in the URLs above? >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Daniel O. Escasa >>>>>>>>>>> independent IT consultant and writer >>>>>>>>>>> contributor, Free Software Magazine >>>>>>>>>>> (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com >>>>>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>>>>> personal blog at http://descasa.i.ph >>>>>>>>>>> Twitter page at http://www.twitter.com/silverlokk >>>>>>>>>>> If we choose being kind over being right, we will be right >>>>>>>>>>> every time. >>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>> >>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>> >>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Danny Ching >>> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Danny Ching >> >> _________________________________________________ >> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >> >> > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
