When you write code, you have to compile it. Here is an easily readable if statement in C:
If ( trump_count > biden_count)
{
trump_count --;
biden_count++;
}
That says if trump has more than biden, then subtract 1 from Trump and add 1 to Biden.
That is an oversimplified example but there would have to be something along those lines in the Smartmatic/Dominion code. So we should be able to get that off of the machines right? Wrong. Machines don't read code like that. That kind of code is compiled so that when it gets on the machine it is all just 1's and 0's and the program called the compiler creates that code and it is generally unreadable.
https://files.catbox.moe/ahpcx1.png
If we knew what the compiler they used was then we could decompile the code and have our smoking gun right there in the code. However, I think they thought that through and created their own compiler so that if the code and compiler are subpoenad, they can hand over a compiler that was designed in a way to obfuscate the offending code.
If you think writing your own compiler is hard, guess again. You just need to know how the CPU works and how storage and memory are addressed. Even that crazy bastard that wrote TempleOS wrote his own compiler.
I cannot believe we aren't dissecting the code forensically, and if someone is, that would be the absolute best way to prove this, beyond statistical analysis, eyewitness testimony, etc.
Happy Thanksgiving.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 26557338? ago (edited ago)
That would mean you're likely younger than me you jackass, I started on a mainframe.
If you simply overwrite code with junk then you will trigger an error when that location is reached again. If its not gonna be reached then it would still be better to use nop/null or fake code as opposed to stack data because using stack data would look weird.
If you were to " overflow" the "biden function" that means you wrote more data than the size of it and were deleting other unrelated code or data as well.
In short you're just throwing around terms you vaguely remember without actually understanding them.
[–] 26557687? ago (edited ago)
OK, same background, fair enough.
this is not understanding the other view on the problem I think.
.
.
drop malicious code somewhere into stack area
run code
"biden + 10,000"
set stack pointer back to start of malicious code
jump back to normal routines
malicious code eventually gets overwritten by normal usage
.
.
I don't know why this is a big deal for you, there is a billion+1 ways to inject untraceable code if you own the system