[–] 26556987? ago 

there are excellent open source compiler frameworks like the excellent llvm/clang stack which, for instance, Apple bases its language compilers off of

so one could get a great deal of leverage by just starting with such an existing compiler and the going to the code generation module (a distinct module in llvm) and work on that to obfuscate - even the higher degrees of optimization alone can tend to make the actual machine instruction sequence rather non-obvious relative to the original source code, but with actual intent, a higher degree of obfuscation could be acheived.

Or one could transform ordinary binary instruction code into an encrypted form that has to be decrypted before it can execute on the target CPU. The decryption could be built into a custom page loader - the decryption key could be provided at program execution time and the key might be kept on something like a removable usb stick or smart card

[–] 26556494? ago  (edited ago)

Decompiling the code (or even analyzing the machine code) certainly could produce conclusive evidence, however only so if the actually used code is still available (hasn’t been replaced nor tampered with).

However, even without that, we know the software (or firmware) stores each vote as a decimal value, and the documentation touts that an adjustment ratio (multiplication factor) can be set, which would weight votes for one candidate — which both Rudy and Sidney have already alluded to being used.

There is no legitimate reason for having this “feature” at all, except to rig an election.

[–] 26557771? ago 

Except in Muslim countries where a male vote equals one, but a female vote equals a third of that.

In South Africa, it is easy to weight the white vote lower than the black vote. Otherwise it is raycist.

It can all be legitimate.

" I will make it legal"

[–] 26555989? ago 

thank you, understood completely

[–] 26555649? ago 

Thanks for breaking that down for us. I was thinking all the scrubbing Dominion was doing was too little, too late but I may be wrong

[–] 26555497? ago 

I can decompile and read assembly. If we get a dump of the os it’s a cake walk

[–] 26556988? ago 

Why would you need a dump of the os as opposed to the actual voting software?

[–] 26555502? ago 

And a do while loop would be better for manipulating the counts

[–] 26555527? [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

We would also need to know what the CPUs in the machines were. If it's x86 based then yeah. I would assume they were x86 based.

[–] 26555475? ago 

Happy Thanksgiving

[–] 26555456? ago 

Depends on the languagne used right? I believe compiled Java files can be decompiled

[–] 26555499? [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

No. It depends on the compiler and the target hardware. You can write code in any languange and have a compiler that takes that code and does fuck all with it so long as the target hardware is capable of using it.

[–] 26555666? ago 

but I've seen decompiled java code myself. Is it not possible to fetch the code from the Dominion machines?

[–] 26556841? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

OP please stop talking out of your ass you're obviously a novice

For one, compiled code is harder to read but its still code. A sufficiently knowledgeable person can read it just fine.

For another, the much bigger issue is determining what actual binary was deployed to the machines.

Voting machines are heavily regulated so there are a lot of checks against stuff like this but obviously no system is perfect.

[–] 26556976? [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

You're not fucking reading 32 or 64 bit compiled code in 1's and 0's fuckwit.

[–] 26557019? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

No of course I wouldn't dumbass, I'd read it in hex.

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)