1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 03 Aug 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 427       Contents:8 Re: Bind a socket to a low port number without privilege8 Re: Bind a socket to a low port number without privilege> Re: Business Week: Scott McNealy as Custer in CEO's Last StandL Re: Distinction between 'retained on completion' and 'retained on error' ???L Re: Distinction between 'retained on completion' and 'retained on error' ??? DS10 questions- Re: Is it decnet problem or Thruway problem ? - Re: Is it decnet problem or Thruway problem ?  Re: Solaris to Itanium... ! Re: Something of passing interest  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems  Re: Touch Screen Voting systems   Re: Which IP Networking Package?  Re: Which IP Networking Package?  Re: Which IP Networking Package?  Re: Which IP Networking Package?  Re: Which IP Networking Package?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:33:40 +0930 * From: Mark Daniel <mark.daniel@vsm.com.au>A Subject: Re: Bind a socket to a low port number without privilege - Message-ID: <410f5504@duster.adelaide.on.net>    Craig A. Berry wrote: , > In article <410e8c8e@usenet01.boi.hp.com>,7 >  "Gorazd Kikelj" <gorazd.kikelj@nospam.hp.com> wrote:  >  > N >>You can't install shearable image with privileges (image activator will drop >>all privileges).; >> For this you need to write a user writen system service.  >  > J > Oops.  Thanks for the reminder.  The UWSS does seem like the robust way  > to go.  G That wasn't exactly what I meant (though the post is poorly composed).  @ Obviously you can have a privileged image linked to and using a H shareable image, but from memory the shareable image must be INSTALLed, C not with privileges, just INSTALLed.  The executable image has the  E INSTALLed privileges and enables/disables them as required.  Can VMS  B Perl easily access the $SETPRV service?  I agree with the general C consensus that Perl is too big a bag of functionality to trust any   distance at all.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 Aug 2004 10:48:45 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) A Subject: Re: Bind a socket to a low port number without privilege 3 Message-ID: <nD6Sn3+Uy+G3@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Z In article <410f5504@duster.adelaide.on.net>, Mark Daniel <mark.daniel@vsm.com.au> writes: > Craig A. Berry wrote: - >> In article <410e8c8e@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, 8 >>  "Gorazd Kikelj" <gorazd.kikelj@nospam.hp.com> wrote: >>   >>  O >>>You can't install shearable image with privileges (image activator will drop  >>>all privileges). < >>> For this you need to write a user writen system service. >>   >>  K >> Oops.  Thanks for the reminder.  The UWSS does seem like the robust way  	 >> to go.  > I > That wasn't exactly what I meant (though the post is poorly composed).  B > Obviously you can have a privileged image linked to and using a J > shareable image, but from memory the shareable image must be INSTALLed, & > not with privileges, just INSTALLed.  F Correct.  The privileged image is trusting the shareable image to meetD its specifications, so the shareable image must be marked as trusted by the system manager.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:20:54 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> G Subject: Re: Business Week: Scott McNealy as Custer in CEO's Last Stand 0 Message-ID: <censen$t88$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Keith Parris wrote: 4 > Interesting cover story in Business Week, July 26:< > http://listserv.encompassus.org/archives/chicago-info.html > ---  > Sun: A CEO's Last Stand  > H > Scott McNealy knows he made many mistakes. Is it too late to recover?  > F > "Sun's sales have tumbled 48% in the past three years, it has lost aE > third of its market share -- and it continues to head south even as H > its rivals ride the economic recovery. Its stock, which reached $64 inF > 2000, trades at about $4. No other major player has been weakened asG > much during the tech downturn. "Right now it looks pretty grim," says E > Geoffrey A. Moore, author of several tech-industry books, including  > Crossing the Chasm." > H > "Sun will struggle to out-innovate larger, and deeper-pocketed, rivalsF > such as IBM. And Sun's track record of diversification is lousy. TheH > reality is that every major initiative to move beyond high-end serversH > over the past decade has failed. "Scott's a smart guy, but I don't seeE > a way out for Sun," says Kevin B. Rollins, chief executive of Dell. D > "Will they disappear? No. But most of the customers we talk to are5 > looking for reasons to use less of their products."  >   / Well how about some facts rather than opinions.   ; 1.	55% of Suns systems revenues comes from 8 way or smaller 9 	servers, not too shabby for a company that has tried and 9 	apparently failed in every major initiative to move away  	from high end servers.   7 2.	The combined unit numbers for just 2 of Sun's volume 9 	servers the V210 and V240 per quarter exceeds the entire 9 	installed base of Itanium systems the apparent pretender 9 	to the 64 bit market throne currently occupied by SPARC.   : 3.	The Sun V880 is the highest selling 8 CPU server of any; 	type, x86, Intanium, Power, Alpha again not too shabby for ; 	a company that has failed to move beyond high end servers.    And finally the killer blow.  = Sun only moved into selling high end servers in 1997 with the > introduction of the E10000 arguably creating the high end UNIX> server market at the same time. So its a tiny bit difficult to= work out how Sun could then have spent the next decade trying A to diversify into low end systems. Unless the article was written 6 in 2007 and you have a working time machine ! Do you ?  ? Again Keith the quality of the material you regurgitate has let ? you down. Perhaps its time to put a stop to your FUD fest, lets 1 face it isn't doing your credibility any favours.    regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 09:35:31 +02003 From: "Alexandre Mongin" <alexandre.mongin@csgv.fr> U Subject: Re: Distinction between 'retained on completion' and 'retained on error' ??? * Message-ID: <cenf7g$bh1$1@news.tiscali.fr>  D > With F$GETQUI you can use the CONDITION_VECTOR item to get the jobH > completion status. I assume there is a corresponding item for $GETQUI.E > This will give you the final status of the job (like $STATUS) which E > will not only tell you if it was retained on error or not, but what  > the error was! >   ? thanks ! this helped me a lot ... I've done what I intended to.    ciao !   ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 09:51:19 +02003 From: "Alexandre Mongin" <alexandre.mongin@csgv.fr> U Subject: Re: Distinction between 'retained on completion' and 'retained on error' ??? * Message-ID: <ceng54$c6m$1@news.tiscali.fr>  * I think I've found what I first wanted to:  7 F$GETQUI("DISPLAY_JOB","JOB_RETAINED",,"RETAINED_JOBS")   G it seems to filter all jobs and just print the 'retained on completion'  jobs....   ------------------------------   Date: 3 Aug 2004 10:26:53 -0700 % From: tadamsmar@yahoo.com (Tom Adams)  Subject: DS10 questions = Message-ID: <ea44f5a1.0408030926.3debb6f3@posting.google.com>   D We just got a new DS10 server but we have not been able to get it to boot.   D We wanted it to come in the door configured to be a workstation, butA the graphics card was omitted.   HP sent us a 3X-DEPVZ-AA that we 
 installed.  C First I connected to an old VRT17-HA monitor and tried to boot. (Or C new monitor has not arrived yet.)  I got nothing but a blue screen.   E Then I tried hooking a dumb terminal to the 25-pin RS232 port.  I got  a backwards question mark.  F I am not sure what to do.  I have never had to boot a pure server withA a dumb terminal, but I know it can be done.  Of course, I am only @ trying to boot dumb because the graphics card is not working - IC figured I might learn something about the status of the system if I   could boot from a dumb terminal.  B The DS10 is running VMS 7.3.2 with the Graphics 0200 patch already4 installed.  Is there some other patch we might need?  D According to the graphics card installation guide, there is a jumper6 to enable/disable VGA.  Where should I put the jumper?  B Is the 25-pin connector the right place to connect a dump terminalE console?  What is the baud rate?  Do I just need pins 2,3,7 connected E to pins 2,3,7 direct or do I need to connected pin 2 to 3 and 3 to 2?   E Does the fact that we have the graphics card installed cause the dumb C terminal console to stop working?  Do I need to remove the graphics . card to get the dumb terminal console to work?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 13:51:53 +0200- From: "Martin Vorlaender" <mv@pdv-systeme.de> 6 Subject: Re: Is it decnet problem or Thruway problem ?* Message-ID: <2n9cj1FtohbeU1@uni-berlin.de>  9 "Jignesh Vyas 'Jigs'" <jignesh_vyas@hotmail.com> wrote...  > I just: > saw one application called "jump" in freeware which says > A > "JUMP allows a user to login exactly  as another user without a  > password. A > It  also  allows a more restricted (non-exact) impersonation of  > another user."  @ I think the most up-to-date version of that utility (or at least! that functionality) is HGLOGIN at < http://vms.process.com/scripts/fileserv/fileserv.com?HGLOGIN   cu,    Martin --  @                           | Martin Vorlaender  |  OpenVMS rules!3  Cetero censeo            | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de F  Redmondem delendam esse. |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/:                           | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:57:37 -0400 & From: David M Smith <dsmit115@csc.com>6 Subject: Re: Is it decnet problem or Thruway problem ?8 Message-ID: <3cdvg0hurt4kvjfaockungdv82ru63djao@4ax.com>  L On 2 Aug 2004 20:01:43 -0700, jignesh_vyas@hotmail.com (Jignesh Vyas 'Jigs') wrote:  z >Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> wrote in message news:<410e1947$0$7322$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>... >> Jignesh Vyas 'Jigs' wrote:  >> . . . >> 	[snip]  > 
 >Hi Keith, > C >Thanks for your information but my biggest problem is that I can't G >touch SYSUAF at all, we have a seperate QA department for it and to do D >any change in SYSUAF requires a long chain of approvals. :)  I just9 >saw one application called "jump" in freeware which says  > @ >"JUMP allows a user to login exactly  as another user without a
 >password.A >It  also  allows a more restricted (non-exact) impersonation of   >another >user."   P Unfortunately, any program of this sort will require elevated VMS privileges forJ execution. I've looked at JUMP, and it requires CMEXEC, CMKRNL, DETACH (orJ IMPERSONATE), SYSNAM, SYSPRV. Similarly, HGLOGIN (which Martin recommends)% appears to require SYSPRV and CMKRNL.   P If you do not have privilege to access SYSUAF, then you would not be able to use these programs. I ------------------------------------------------------------------------- I David M. Smith 302.391.8533                       dsmit115 at csc dot com I Computer Sciences Corporation     (Opinions are those of the writer only) I -------------------------------------------------------------------------    ------------------------------   Date: 3 Aug 2004 10:21:08 -0700 1 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) " Subject: Re: Solaris to Itanium...= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0408030921.5d312d6b@posting.google.com>   d Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in message news:<877jsjsefg.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>...9 > rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) writes: E > > If Itanium turns out to be "good enough" in performance, and also H > > profitable for Intel and the system makers, and the systems run VMS,. > > then I'll be satisfied with the situation. > " > Read Bob Caldwells talk on that.  ? Paul, could you provide a reference? In a Google search on "Bob 2 Caldwell" and "Itanium" I found only this article:? http://www.computer.org/computer/homepage/0104/random/index.htm   F It was quite interesting reading, but its content actually seems to be# supportive of Itanium. For example:   D "According to Modern Processor Design by John Paul Shen and Mikko H.E Lipasti (McGraw-Hill, 2003), microarchitecture advances have led from F 0.1-instructions-per-cycle machines in 1970 to 2-IPC machines in 2003,F a 20-fold improvement. In that same period, clock rates increased fromB 0.1MHz to today's 3GHz, a 30,000-fold improvement. So who gets the8 credit for faster chips - the architects or the processC technologists? This isn't quite fair, of course. Had the architects B not provided microarchitectures capable of being run at those fast@ clock rates, numbers like 3GHz would not have been attained. And@ designing for fast clocks causes a decided loss in efficiency asA measured by instructions/clock. Taking that into account, I still B score process technology as being at least two orders of magnitudeB more important than architecture in terms of delivered performance over that time period."   D So he's saying architecture is 100 times less important than processE technology. (And as a former Intel IA32 architect, he would certainly D know the impact of process technology on the speed of Pentium 4s and Xeons.)   F I visited an Intel facility in the latter half of last year, and thereC were posters on the walls exhorting employees to help Intel stay at 6 least one process generation ahead of the competition.  D As long as they retain that lead in process technology, architecture matters much less.  D I'm with Robert. If it works correctly, and it runs OpenVMS, I don't! care what CPU architecture it is.    ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 11:34:50 +0200  From: "Dr. Dweeb" <dr@dweeb.com>* Subject: Re: Something of passing interest, Message-ID: <cenm7r$fri$1@news.cybercity.dk>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > Dr. Dweeb wrote:A >> http://h71000.www7.hp.com/solutions/oracle/scalability_rdb.pdf  >> >> > It passed by earlier > 	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrison   L Sorry, I did not notice.  A quick look seems to indicate that perhaps it wasL not on my news server - not all posts seem to be distributed to all servers.   Dweeb.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:11:20 GMT ) From: Andrew Walters <awxrt001@yahoo.com> ( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems< Message-ID: <c0GPc.5785$AY5.1928@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>   Jack Peacock wrote: 8 > "Andrew Walters" <awxrt001@yahoo.com> wrote in message; > news:i_UOc.102441$KW7.96872@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...  > I >>Is there a problem using handheld devices in the same way that UPS uses & >>them to get an electronic signature? >> > N > Yes, because voting is secret, a signature is never directly associated withG > the vote.  Not sure what other states do but in my county it's all by K > number.  To determine who cast a vote is a lengthy manual process: obtain G > the vote receipt number (asssuming you know it, or the voter kept the K > receipt), go to the precinct book, manually look up the receipt number to L > see the voter's name.  The precinct book is in name order, not receipt, soN > it would involve reading every single page to find the receipt number writenK > in manually by a precinct worker.  There's still a signature, but it's in N > the precinct book and isn't recorded anywhere electronically.  The link fromN > vote to name can only be obtained with a tedious manual search, as it should > be.  > N > Going the other way is faster, name to receipt to vote, but that's not how aJ > recount works.  I for one would rather have the registrar ignore spoiledN > ballots instead of getting a call and having someone read off my selections,L > then ask me if it was correct.  At some point there has to be trust in theK > people who run the local elections department.   I trust the registrar to G > keep the precinct books secure and away from the curious; it's a good K > compromise between secrecy and preventing fraud.  Any changes in e-voting L > that doesn't keep names out of the electronic loop would give me cause for& > concern, because it isn't necessary. >   Jack Peacock >  >   I I didn't suggest using a signature; people can key in their pin secretly  F at the bank and the teller doesn't need to know the number there. The I handheld device is a subset of the touchscreen vote machine presented at  I the polling booths. An officer simply carries it to the bedside of those  G unable to vote in person and turns away whilst they make their choice!   Obvious stuff really.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:14:55 GMT ) From: Andrew Walters <awxrt001@yahoo.com> ( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems< Message-ID: <z3GPc.5786$AY5.2843@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:5 > In article <k$rPTemY4JRX@eisner.encompasserve.org>, @ > 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > W >>In article <2n6v08Ft0q8mU1@uni-berlin.de>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:  >>C >>>Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained  >>>by stupidity. >>0 >>    Like no knowing where your own WMD aren't. >  >   J > Yeah, people keep bringing this up.  Sadly, no one seems to remember theH > Iraqi general on CNN or FOX when the war first began who openly statedJ > that they did in fact have chemical and biological weapons but had movedJ > them over the border into Syria seversl weeks prior.  And then there areF > the pictures of the Army (or maybe USMC, the uniforms look the same)I > pulling a MIG out of the sand where it had been buried in order to hide J > it.  If they could hide entire fighter jets is it unreasonable to assumeH > they couldn't hide things the size of a small fire extinguisher in all! > those square miles of desert?     @ It was bluster to bait washington and boy did the neo-cons bite!   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 10:45:48 +0200 0 From: Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de>( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systemsA Message-ID: <410f50bd$0$7308$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>    Hamlyn Mootoo wrote:F > I just happened to be looking in on this newsgroup as I haven't readD > it in quite a while, and saw this topic.  Coincidently, I had justB > drafted a memo which I sent to a couple Congressmen and SenatorsC > concerning this very issue. What I wrote to them (modified to fit  > here) follows: > 3 > Start of memo____________________________________  > B > Concerning the bills before Congress regarding electronic votingF > machines having to produce paper receipts, I respectfully submit two) > suggestions which you may find helpful:  > C > 1) In addition to requiring electronic voting machines to produce G > human and machine readable receipts to deposit in a lockbox so that a H > physical recount may be subsequently done, I would advocate that theseA > receipts have a unique non-decipherable transaction number, and ? > election results from each precinct be uploaded to a PUBLICLY D > available web site that would list each transaction number and theC > associated votes.  Ideally, this information would be uploaded no G > later than one day after all votes are cast.  This way, a voter could H > take his of her receipt and go to the website to make sure that his orH > her vote actually showed up there.  Since only transaction numbers areE > used, who voted for whom remains completely anonymous-- a voter can E > only verify his/her own vote to make sure it shows up, because only H > that person has the unique number.  If a voter's vote does not show upD > on the web site, it can be reported to the appropriate authoritiesE > immediately.  This way, literally anyone in the world with internet H > access could verify ANY election personally, by simply counting up allE > the votes on the web site. You could also go so far as to include a G > passcode so that a voter could go to the site to indicate that he/she G > verified his/her vote, so that fraudulent duplicates could not occur.  > F > For instance, a (simplified) example of a single web site page could > look like this:  > G > Voter:          Pres.        Senate    House   Local1 Local2 Verified F > ------------   ------------- --------- ------ ------- -----  -------C > x43fd58r23r    Kerry         Kennedy   Markey Smith   Jones     Y C > yer452kjk86    Bush          Hatch     Hyde   Johnson Parker    N C > pw32de42se5    Kerry         Biden     Markey Smythe  Sununu    Y C > vd45s3299kj    Bush          Hatch     Hyde   Curry   Parker    Y  > ( > And a voter's receipt could look like: > 2 > ------------------------------------------------" > Date: nov 4, 2004 Time: 14:12:02 > yer452kjk86        >  >  > Pass Code: tre54g37h8we43 1 > -----------------------------------------------  > D > 2) The second suggestion, although not related to the first, wouldH > work rather well with the first.  I would advocate holding what I callG > an election lottery.  That is, a portion of federal election campaign F > funds would be reserved for a NATIONAL election day lottery, wherebyH > simply casting a vote enters the voter into a drawing for REAL MONEY. D > For instance, there could be  a national 1 million dollar prize asG > well as a state $100,000 prize, and County $1,000 prizes.  Again this G > is not related to the first suggestion above, it would only require a C > paper voting ticket from the machine, not any type of web site or F > voting record.  A large percentage of the country, especially peopleF > who are not wealthy, who generally don't vote, buy lottery tickets. F > This sort of incentive I believe, would drive millions more to vote,G > because there would be a more perceptible potential reward associated F > with the act of voting. And publicly televising who the winners wereF > would go a long way to promoting more participation, just like state > lotteries do.  > > > End of memo_________________________________________________ > H > As far as the "vote for sale" problem is concerned, this system, would@ > provide the best EVIDENCE of votes being sold, since one couldA > statistically scan the data for suspicious relationships at the H > precinct or higher level.  To orchestrate a vote-for-hire scheme largeG > enough to influence a major election would be EXTREMEMLY difficult on C > a statewide or national basis, since it would require independent H > collusion by thousands of voters, and absolute secrecy by ALL of them.    G That second proposal is a very interesting idea for other reasons than  I just promoting voter participation. The existing lottery systems already  F successfully handle many of the requirements for an electronic voting I system. The lotteries provide a ready-made infrastructure which pays for  F itself, and in most countries are also state controlled or sponsored. I State Lotteries have been running for decades with few known problems in  F a potentially hostile environment inwhich one could greatly profit by C corrupting the system, and their systems being tested and stressed  C daily/weekly. Their customers are not known to require any special  A educational level to use the system, and they often have lots of   practise with it as well.   H Of course their are a few aspects which are not handled by the existing F lottery systems. Including, but not limited to the voter's ability to I verify the counting of their vote without opening up vote selling abuse;  D separating the voters decision from the selection/announcement of a E lottery winner; public verifiability of untampered code (why doesn't  I anyone question the lottery system code? Statistics?); and resolving the  H situation, from lottery employees who are theoretically impartial since B they and their relatives are disqualified from winning, over to a , controlled allowance to vote in an election.  F I would like to leave questions of morality in combining election and @ lottery systems, along with bribing citizens to vote, who would G otherwise (rightly?) disqualify themselves due to lack of interest, to  A another thread, perhaps another forum. Interested persons should  E organise themselves. Here we should try to stay with the technically  C oriented practical questions, which may have some relevance to VMS.    I will now do my part...  H In reference to the importance of the operating system to it's security F (non-corruptibility) and stability, it's no accident that over 80% of E the world's lotteries are using OpenVMS as their primary system, and  I that 4 of 5 of the major lottery system vendors (the fifth is porting to  F VMS) provide OpenVMS-based systems.   I once studied the history of a E lottery organisation which interviewed for me for a job. In the 70's  I they had over 500 employees. Today they have only about 50, their profit  ? (after paying winners) in this time span had increased inverse  C proportionally. The lottery organisations require that their money  G machines be the most reliable, secure and easy to manage, and they can  6 generally afford the best without any practical limit.   Cheers!    Keith Cayemberg ) IBM Business Services - Hannover, Germany    Semi-Nonstandard Disclaimer:3 Any non-official claims concerning my semi-official * opinions are hereby officially disclaimed.  i.e. I said it, not my employer.0 (and no I didn't steal this one from Yogi Berra)   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:04:29 GMT 3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) ( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems2 Message-ID: <NXMPc.7082$oc2.6976@news.cpqcorp.net>  7 In article <00A35C1D.A2C8D61B@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>,  N winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes: ..N >... Fully computerized voting can be manipulated wholesale; that's not good.  ..    The manipulators might disagree.   --  J       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:11:30 GMT 3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) ( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems0 Message-ID: <m2NPc.7084$oc2.32@news.cpqcorp.net>  - In article <410EEB0C.6010102@tsoft-inc.com>,  * David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  Q >When the computer displays the voter's entries, as seperate data, then I really  : >cannot see the voter doubting what the computer recorded.  F I suspect that almost everyone who reads this newgroup would find it a= trivial exercise to write a probram (even in DCL!) that would   ,     (1) Read user input -- such as "a vote".#     (2) Display whatever was input. !     (3) Print whatever was input. >     (3) Write something entirely different in a file/database.   --  J       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:10:21 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems, Message-ID: <410FAADD.4020602@tsoft-inc.com>   Charlie Hammond wrote:  / > In article <410EEB0C.6010102@tsoft-inc.com>,  , > David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: >  > R >>When the computer displays the voter's entries, as seperate data, then I really ; >>cannot see the voter doubting what the computer recorded.  >> > H > I suspect that almost everyone who reads this newgroup would find it a? > trivial exercise to write a probram (even in DCL!) that would  > . >     (1) Read user input -- such as "a vote".% >     (2) Display whatever was input. # >     (3) Print whatever was input. @ >     (3) Write something entirely different in a file/database. >  >   
 Very true.  P But you're then suggesting that a computerized voting system would be wide open M to hackers and such.  A recent post by Keith Cayemberg suggests that lottery  K systems exist in a potentially hostile environment, but seem to be able to  M resist many of the problems you're saying would exist in computerized voting.   O I think my biggest problem with some of the posts in this thread is those from  P people who's job is to find solutions to problems claiming that this particular  problem has no valid solutions.    Dave   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------   Date: 3 Aug 2004 09:00:28 -0700 0 From: dave.baxter@bannerhealth.com (Dave Baxter)( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems= Message-ID: <a3c44af1.0408030800.1e13d868@posting.google.com>   _ Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> wrote in message news:<020820042242520229%nospam@yrl.co.uk>... D > In article <a3c44af1.0408021339.43ac60d1@posting.google.com>, Dave. > Baxter <dave.baxter@bannerhealth.com> wrote: > # > (Received here least three times) F > >    I have really enjoyed this thread  (although it is clearly OT). > . > Is this a case of "post early - post often"?  D Sorry about the multiple postings. A little confusion between me andD the postmaster.   My first attempt to post appeared to fail, and theE last was due to impatience on my part, I should have waited longer (> E 5 hours) for the posting to appear.   I jumped the gun because of the  initial uncertainty.  ! I shall be mor patient in future.    Dave.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:56:03 GMT 3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) ( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems0 Message-ID: <DsPPc.7105$Lq2.24@news.cpqcorp.net>  - In article <410FAADD.4020602@tsoft-inc.com>,  * David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:   ..Q >But you're then suggesting that a computerized voting system would be wide open  N >to hackers and such.  A recent post by Keith Cayemberg suggests that lottery L >systems exist in a potentially hostile environment, but seem to be able to N >resist many of the problems you're saying would exist in computerized voting.   This is a very good point.  H Of course it is possible that the lottery systems have NOT resisited the. problems -- we just havn't found out about it.  D There is also the fact that we expect most lottery players to loose,L so each player has a lot less on-the-line, so to speak.  In an two-candidate/ election, fully half the players expect to win.   C This doesn't change the issues of computer security, but it give us @ less interest in avoiding even the appearance of possible fraud.  I And, generally, the people who run the lottery are not elligible to play. F Election officials are in fact politicians; they are playing the game.  O In any case, Thanks for giving me yet another reason NOT to play the lotteries.    --  J       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:19:35 +0100 & From: Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk>( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems1 Message-ID: <030820041819356466%nospam@yrl.co.uk>   B In article <a3c44af1.0408030800.1e13d868@posting.google.com>, Dave, Baxter <dave.baxter@bannerhealth.com> wrote:  3 > Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> wrote in message / > news:<020820042242520229%nospam@yrl.co.uk>... F > > In article <a3c44af1.0408021339.43ac60d1@posting.google.com>, Dave0 > > Baxter <dave.baxter@bannerhealth.com> wrote: > > % > > (Received here least three times) H > > >    I have really enjoyed this thread  (although it is clearly OT). > > 0 > > Is this a case of "post early - post often"? > F > Sorry about the multiple postings. A little confusion between me andF > the postmaster.   My first attempt to post appeared to fail, and theG > last was due to impatience on my part, I should have waited longer (> G > 5 hours) for the posting to appear.   I jumped the gun because of the  > initial uncertainty.  B It was an irresistable opportunity to crack a feeble joke. It alsoC helped to illustrate the obvious point that electronic voting has a D social aspect. It really has to be *seen* to be working, even better7 than previous manual methods can be seen to be working.e  F The Chaum paper addresses some of that, but you need a decent grasp of  number theory to see it working.   --  C I thought I would be the last on earth to mangle my e-mail address.a fsnospam$elliott$$   ------------------------------  * Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:39:58 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk( Subject: Re: Touch Screen Voting systems) Message-ID: <ceoile$q6d$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>e  W In article <410FAADD.4020602@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:y >Charlie Hammond wrote:V >n0 >> In article <410EEB0C.6010102@tsoft-inc.com>, - >> David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:o >>   >> gS >>>When the computer displays the voter's entries, as seperate data, then I really N< >>>cannot see the voter doubting what the computer recorded. >>>- >> -I >> I suspect that almost everyone who reads this newgroup would find it an@ >> trivial exercise to write a probram (even in DCL!) that would >> n/ >>     (1) Read user input -- such as "a vote".u& >>     (2) Display whatever was input.$ >>     (3) Print whatever was input.A >>     (3) Write something entirely different in a file/database.w >>   >>   >  >Very true.n >lQ >But you're then suggesting that a computerized voting system would be wide open >N >to hackers and such.  A recent post by Keith Cayemberg suggests that lottery L >systems exist in a potentially hostile environment, but seem to be able to N >resist many of the problems you're saying would exist in computerized voting. >o  G All the lottery systems I know of fundamentally rely on a paper system.fH In order to claim the prize you have to have the printed lottery ticket.M (There is usually provision for a discretionary payment if you have lost yoursH ticket but you would need to be very convincing as to where and when you2 purchased it to get the prize without the ticket).  L When you pay your money you get your numbers which you can verify since they are printed out on the ticket.I True there is still a chance that the numbers were not transmitted to the  lottery backend system.tL In that case you are probably out of luck - when you win you can try sueing G the shop owner but you probably won't have much luck sueing the Lotteryn	 operator.a+ In the UK Camelot has the following rule :-o  J "The promoter accepts no responsibility for the entries on the face of theJ ticket differing from the entries on Camelot Group plc's central computer"    N In a lottery the main focus is on preventing someone wrongly claiming a prize.N If someone misses out on a prize they were really entitled to then thats theirP bad luck (Though the operator will try and minimise the chance of that happeningJ since they don't want bad publicity they can't guarantee it won't happen).  M In an election everybody's vote should be counted equally and there should be,J no possibilty that what is on the "central computer" is not what the voterK intended (ie not what was printed on the screen or on a paper receipt whichb2 the user was able to view to validate their vote).    
 David Webb Security Team Leader CCSS Middlesex University      P >I think my biggest problem with some of the posts in this thread is those from Q >people who's job is to find solutions to problems claiming that this particular s  >problem has no valid solutions. >O >Dave  >n >-- 5 >David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450 5 >Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596e? >DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.comi >170 Grimplin Road >Vanderbilt, PA  15486 >    ------------------------------   Date: 3 Aug 2004 05:43:45 -0700v( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)) Subject: Re: Which IP Networking Package?h= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0408030443.3d9712f0@posting.google.com>a  M healyzh@aracnet.com wrote in message news:<cemnsn013up@enews2.newsguy.com>...0 > K > I went with TCPIP (UCX at the time) as hobbyist licenses didn't exist for N > TCPware or Multinet at that time.  I've stayed with TCPIP in part becuase ofL > my existing experience with it, and in part because I wanted to stick withG > the stack owned by the same company that owns the OS.  I've seriouslysO > considered switching at times over features such as anti-spam, xdm, and ssh. tM > Finally TCPIP has all the features that I need at the moment, now if they'dsH > just work on the performance.  At least the performance is better than. > CMUIP on a MicroVAX II running VMS 5.5-2 :^) >  > 		Zane  : they don't own it ... its the bsd kernel ... its just like8 apache and everything else they have, it is unix garbage5 ported to vms because they are either too lazy or too 5 cheap to do things the right way like DEC used to ... 5 TCPware was designed in the DEC tradition ... it was a2 designed for vms and it runs the best ... same for8 purveyor ... hopefully someday someone buys vms and then6 throws out apache and ucx and incorporates TCPware and3 purveyor into vms, then that would be something ...    ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:08:28 +0200- From: "Martin Vorlaender" <mv@pdv-systeme.de> ) Subject: Re: Which IP Networking Package?U* Message-ID: <2n9h2kFs8q7tU1@uni-berlin.de>  ( "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> ...< > they don't own it ... its the bsd kernel ... its just like: > apache and everything else they have, it is unix garbage ...e- > hopefully someday someone buys vms and then08 > throws out apache and ucx and incorporates TCPware and5 > purveyor into vms, then that would be something ...w  8 As you are probably aware, lots of parts of MultiNet got5 incorporated into TCPware beginning with version 5.5.e How's that for Unix garbage?   cu,m   Martin -- y@   OpenVMS:                | Martin Vorlaender  |  OpenVMS rules!3    The operating system   | work: mv@pdv-systeme.deoF    God runs the           |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/:    earth simulation on.   | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 07:27:57 -0600n% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>i) Subject: Re: Which IP Networking Package? B Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20040803072648.023ab248@raptor.psccos.com>  . At 07:08 AM 8/3/2004, Martin Vorlaender wrote:) >"Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> ....> > > they don't own it ... its the bsd kernel ... its just like< > > apache and everything else they have, it is unix garbage >.../ > > hopefully someday someone buys vms and then : > > throws out apache and ucx and incorporates TCPware and7 > > purveyor into vms, then that would be something ...  >-9 >As you are probably aware, lots of parts of MultiNet got96 >incorporated into TCPware beginning with version 5.5. >How's that for Unix garbage?b  H But fundamentally, the TCPware kernel is still a different creature than the MultiNet kernel.   ------J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+J | Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |J | Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |J | Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |J | http://www.process.com        |                                        |J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:55:11 +0200- From: "Martin Vorlaender" <mv@pdv-systeme.de> ) Subject: Re: Which IP Networking Package? * Message-ID: <2n9jq8Fu6416U1@uni-berlin.de>  % "Dan O'Reilly" <dano@process.com> ...a0 > At 07:08 AM 8/3/2004, Martin Vorlaender wrote:+ > >"Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> ...t@ > > > they don't own it ... its the bsd kernel ... its just like> > > > apache and everything else they have, it is unix garbage > >...1 > > > hopefully someday someone buys vms and thene< > > > throws out apache and ucx and incorporates TCPware and9 > > > purveyor into vms, then that would be something ...  > >s; > >As you are probably aware, lots of parts of MultiNet got 8 > >incorporated into TCPware beginning with version 5.5. > >How's that for Unix garbage?t > J > But fundamentally, the TCPware kernel is still a different creature than > the MultiNet kernel.  > Of course it is, on the kernel level. But on the layers above, it's Unix garbage all over ;-)  H I apologize for not being able to resist. In fact, I do like the Process@ TCP/IP stacks (a lot better than UCX heir). It's just that Bob'sG "everything's *ix is crap - TCPware and Purveyor are the only answer tosK all our problems" attitude upsets me every time - even though I prefer VMS.e   cu,a   Martin --  D One OS to rule them all       | Martin Vorlaender  |  OpenVMS rules!7 One OS to find them           | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de J One OS to bring them all      |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/> And in the Darkness bind them.| home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:42:49 -0400* From: Brian Hechinger <wonko@4amlunch.net>) Subject: Re: Which IP Networking Package?e6 Message-ID: <20040803144249.GE14217@ford.4amlunch.net>  B On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 03:55:11PM +0200, Martin Vorlaender wrote: > J > I apologize for not being able to resist. In fact, I do like the ProcessB > TCP/IP stacks (a lot better than UCX heir). It's just that Bob'sI > "everything's *ix is crap - TCPware and Purveyor are the only answer to M > all our problems" attitude upsets me every time - even though I prefer VMS.p  M i have to back you up there martin.  i have been using *nix for over 12 yearstN now, and it is not crap.  windows is crap.  i mean, come on, they took a bunchN of vms and managed to ruin it.  linux is not *nix btw as far as i'm concerned.   -brian -- .L "The cats tend to administer themselves, and contrary to the expected facts,O the house and everything in it was installed for their benefit."   -- Nic Clews_   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.427 ************************