Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politicus USA)   Rachel Maddow announces plans to trap Russian cyber spies by setting up a fake website dedicated to secession. Usually traps work better if you don't publicly announce them   ( politicususa.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Rachel Maddow, fake secession movement, secessionist movement, fake secessionist movement, Russian trolls, Russian support, real American Muslims, Secession  
•       •       •

611 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Sep 2017 at 9:20 AM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-09-28 08:03:51 AM  
The plan will be fine.  Nobody really watches Rachel.
 
2017-09-28 08:06:19 AM  
I'm thinking this is a diversion. She's actually going to set up another "organization" no one knows about and see if they bite on that.
 
2017-09-28 08:08:09 AM  
So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines, to hide Wisconsin from Hillary Clinton...but they won't see this story?

Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.
 
2017-09-28 08:22:43 AM  
Considering that we are currently led by a twat twipping over his own tweets, this plan is bulletproof.
 
2017-09-28 08:24:35 AM  

Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines, to hide Wisconsin from Hillary Clinton...but they won't see this story?

Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.


img.fark.net
 
2017-09-28 08:25:13 AM  

ox45tallboy: I'm thinking this is a diversion. She's actually going to set up another "organization" no one knows about and see if they bite on that.


Like a Russian nesting doll, she will have a secession movement website within a secession movement website within a secession movement website.
 
2017-09-28 09:12:02 AM  

Chris Ween: ox45tallboy: I'm thinking this is a diversion. She's actually going to set up another "organization" no one knows about and see if they bite on that.

Like a Russian nesting doll, she will have a secession movement website within a secession movement website within a secession movement website.


img2-ak.lst.fm

If you watched her show, you'd know it's working for the Russians.
 
2017-09-28 09:22:12 AM  
Fark: "How does jokes works?"
 
2017-09-28 09:23:09 AM  

lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"


They don't work for Conservatives.
 
2017-09-28 09:24:35 AM  
The website can be named, seanhannityratings.com, then it will trap all his viewers.
 
2017-09-28 09:26:37 AM  

lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"


It's because of her dead pan humor.
 
2017-09-28 09:29:32 AM  

Snarfangel: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

It's because of her dead pan humor.


I'm sure if she used a ventriloquist's dummy dressed like a dead terrist, more people would recognize that she's joking.
 
2017-09-28 09:29:53 AM  

basicstock: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

They don't work for Conservatives.


Not unless someone gets hurt, imprisoned, driven to homelessness, or killed as a punchline. Then conservatives find it hilarious.
 
2017-09-28 09:30:34 AM  

lostcat: Snarfangel: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

It's because of her dead pan humor.

I'm sure if she used a ventriloquist's dummy dressed like a dead terrist, more people would recognize that she's joking.


The "It's not me! I'm not a racist! It's the dummy!!!" defense.
 
2017-09-28 09:31:15 AM  

lostcat: Snarfangel: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

It's because of her dead pan humor.

I'm sure if she used a ventriloquist's dummy dressed like a dead terrist, more people would recognize that she's joking.


Wouldn't it be better to dress him up like Stalin or Lenin then?
 
hej [TotalFark]
2017-09-28 09:31:33 AM  
Did she spend about 20 minutes alluding to and building up to the explanation of this plan before giving that one sentence explanation?
 
2017-09-28 09:32:25 AM  
Yes, but have you seen how dumb 48% of this country is?
 
2017-09-28 09:32:51 AM  

basicstock: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

They don't work for Conservatives.


We just had a thread on this last night
 
2017-09-28 09:33:49 AM  
Usually traps work better if you don't publicly announce them.

Trump announced his candidacy trap a year before election and tons of people fell into it.
 
2017-09-28 09:34:25 AM  
Unless she did it 3 months ago and will reveal the results next week.
 
2017-09-28 09:34:33 AM  

Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...


Support anyone that is not Hillary Clinton = "super crafty?"

Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty......and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines


You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Chris Ween: Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.


Agreed.
 
2017-09-28 09:36:14 AM  
I laughed, but I'm going to be annoyed if this kicks off a Foucault's Pendulum plot and New Mexico actually secedes
 
2017-09-28 09:36:43 AM  
Rachel said she didn't think the Russians watched her show.  I wouldn't be surprised if they tuned in.
 
2017-09-28 09:37:34 AM  

hej: Did she spend about 20 minutes alluding to and building up to the explanation of this plan before giving that one sentence explanation?


Starting with "Dude.."
 
2017-09-28 09:37:52 AM  
Don't let the tongue in cheek joke mislead you into a perfect headline subby...

wanker.
 
2017-09-28 09:38:11 AM  
Operational security FTW, Rachel!
I know your heart's in the right place, and I amrooting for you, but JFC
 
2017-09-28 09:39:21 AM  
The only way her trap works is if her (fake) movement is successful.  The easiest way for it to be successful is for her to promote it.  For those unsure about the strategy -- "it started out as a trap" is a factual statement.  Who the fark thinks facts matter anymore?

For those still unsure, look up "self-deportation."  That started as a comedy skit using a guy named "Daniel D. Portado" (get it?) on the radio that ultimately became part of the 2012 Republican platform.

If you think "__[INSERT FACTUAL STATEMENT HERE]___" matters, then you severely underestimate the stupidity of the American Public.
 
2017-09-28 09:39:21 AM  
Pretty sure there are traps online that people fall for all the time despite knowing they are traps...

vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net

Sadly Ms. Maddow cannot be involved in said traps, because I have it on good authority that traps are not gay.
 
2017-09-28 09:41:08 AM  
I like traps.

Wait, what?
 
2017-09-28 09:41:23 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-09-28 09:42:33 AM  

lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?


Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.
 
2017-09-28 09:45:05 AM  
Well, I see subby completely didn't get it.

This isn't meant to be some super secret plot of subterfuge nor it is completely a joke.
The idea is to see if Russia's methods are selective or are so brute force that they'll bite at an obvious fake movement.
 
2017-09-28 09:50:14 AM  

Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines, to hide Wisconsin from Hillary Clinton...but they won't see this story?

Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.

I'll see your O'Donnell (Lawrence) and raise your a Santelli. Nobody does a meltdown rant like Tea Party founder Rick Santelli working for money.

img.fark.net
 
2017-09-28 09:53:42 AM  

Lucky LaRue: Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines, to hide Wisconsin from Hillary Clinton...but they won't see this story?

Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.

[img.fark.net image 800x420]


Bill O'Reilly Freakout Dubstep Remix!!!
Youtube DxxR8JFsvlc

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

WUB WUB WUB

WUB WUB WUB
 
2017-09-28 10:01:27 AM  

ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.


The bolded part of course is the significant difference between a Russian hacking a polling machine and a Russian hacking someone's email.  So equating the difficulty level of the two would be an exceptionally stupid thing to do, right?
 
2017-09-28 10:04:17 AM  

WilderKWight: lostcat: Snarfangel: lostcat: Fark: "How does jokes works?"

It's because of her dead pan humor.

I'm sure if she used a ventriloquist's dummy dressed like a dead terrist, more people would recognize that she's joking.

The "It's not me! I'm not a racist! It's the dummy!!!" defense.


Works for Putin!

img.fark.net
 
2017-09-28 10:12:27 AM  

ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.


The machines at our polling places are connected only to each other. (If there are multiple machines in the precinct.) After the voter's id is certified, he's given a 4 digit code by the central controller which the voter enters  in the polling booth to gain access to the ballot. After all the choices are made by the voter, there's a VOTE button on the last screen of choices which sends the votes to the central control box. All unconnected to the internet. At the end of the voting day, the totals in the central controller print 2 tabulation paper tapes. One of those goes to downtown to the county clerks office with the dismantled controller and one of the tapes is hung up in a public place for the citizenry to examine. (Political party reps, news reporters, and election-junkies crowd around and copy the numbers.) We have 4 precinct workers, 2 reps from each major party, to keep their eyes  on the machines so that there's no shenanigans.

It sounds good, but I still don't like the set-up. No audit trail. No easy way at the precinct level to audit the firmware to see if it has been diddled after the ballot has been loaded. I presume that there are things like checksums involved to make sure that both firmware and ballot match what they're supposed to be, but I don't know.
 
2017-09-28 10:13:30 AM  
This is why we never win btw, stupid shiat like this.
 
2017-09-28 10:17:42 AM  

lennavan: ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.

The bolded part of course is the significant difference between a Russian hacking a polling machine and a Russian hacking someone's email.  So equating the difficulty level of the two would be an exceptionally stupid thing to do, right?


The bolded part of course is the significant  difference between what I wrote and you thought I wrote.

Also, Podesta's email wasn't "hacked", it was pure social engineering. I know the ladies who work the polls every election day, and it would not be difficult to call the local election commission and inform them they need to do a software update the day before, or to intercept the count  going to the state Secretary of State's office by rerouting the connection or gaining access to the VPN at the SecState's office, it could be done remotely.

The easiest way is just to truck in some script kiddies and pay them to take a USB drive into the voting booth.
 
2017-09-28 10:20:59 AM  

yakmans_dad: ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.

The machines at our polling places are connected only to each other. (If there are multiple machines in the precinct.) After the voter's id is certified, he's given a 4 digit code by the central controller which the voter enters  in the polling booth to gain access to the ballot. After all the choices are made by the voter, there's a VOTE button on the last screen of choices which sends the votes to the central control box. All unconnected to the internet. At the end of the voting day, the totals in the central controller print 2 tabulation paper tapes. One of those goes to downtown to the county clerks office with the dismantled controller and one of the tapes is hung up in a public place for the citizenry to examine. (Political party reps, news reporters, and election-junkies crowd around and copy the numbers.) We have 4 precinct workers, 2 reps from each major party, to keep their eyes  on the machines so that there's no shenanigans.

It sounds good, but I still don't like the set-up. No audit trail. No easy way at the precinct level to audit the firmware to see if it has been diddled after the ballot has been loaded. I presume that there are ...


Countries with far more complicated logistics than the US cope with just paper ballots (with Xs on a sheet, no OMR machines) and the results trickle in pretty much the same way the US's mixed system does, and over the same time frame.

There is zero need for any electronics whatsoever.
 
2017-09-28 10:22:43 AM  

yakmans_dad: ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.

The machines at our polling places are connected only to each other. (If there are multiple machines in the precinct.) After the voter's id is certified, he's given a 4 digit code by the central controller which the voter enters  in the polling booth to gain access to the ballot. After all the choices are made by the voter, there's a VOTE button on the last screen of choices which sends the votes to the central control box. All unconnected to the internet. At the end of the voting day, the totals in the central controller print 2 tabulation paper tapes. One of those goes to downtown to the county clerks office with the dismantled controller and one of the tapes is hung up in a public place for the citizenry to examine. (Political party reps, news reporters, and election-junkies crowd around and copy the numbers.) We have 4 precinct workers, 2 reps from each major party, to keep their eyes  on the machines so that there's no shenanigans.

It sounds good, but I still don't like the set-up. No audit trail. No easy way at the precinct level to audit the firmware to see if it has been diddled after the ballot has been loaded. I presume that there are ...


Works the same here, except I vote at the county registrar's office (well, the Courthouse anyway). But as far as I know the vote totals are sent via dial-up VPN.

Also, chksums can be exactly the same with different code if the coder knows what he's doing.
 
2017-09-28 10:24:51 AM  
Advertise a trap, then anything similar that comes after it would be suspected as the trap.

The morons will be second-guessing themselves for days.
 
2017-09-28 10:26:35 AM  

lennavan: ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.

The bolded part of course is the significant difference between a Russian hacking a polling machine and a Russian hacking someone's email.  So equating the difficulty level of the two would be an exceptionally stupid thing to do, right?


Because no undocumented immigrants ever voted- right? Their goes the Dotard-in-chief and Kris Kobach's narrative.
 
2017-09-28 10:27:48 AM  

Bungles: Countries with far more complicated logistics than the US cope with just paper ballots (with Xs on a sheet, no OMR machines) and the results trickle in pretty much the same way the US's mixed system does, and over the same time frame.

There is zero need for any electronics whatsoever.


images.csmonitor.com

Iraq did it in the middle of a freakin' war.

I mean, they probably had a pirated copy of Excel 2000 on a Windows 98 box at an office in Baghdad for the final tabulation, but they knew who the Parliament and President were that night.
 
2017-09-28 10:29:51 AM  

orclover: This is why we never win btw, stupid shiat like this.


A memey joke on an opinion show isn't the reason anybody does or doesn't win anything.
 
2017-09-28 10:30:21 AM  

ox45tallboy: The bolded part of course is the significant difference between what I wrote and you thought I wrote.


You wrote about what a Russian could do if he/she had physical access to the voting machine. 

There is an enormous difference between having physical access to a terminal versus having to do it remotely, especially if it's not always connected to the internet.

Did I really have to explain that to you?
 
2017-09-28 10:33:47 AM  

orclover: This is why we never win btw, stupid shiat like this.


who is "we" and what exactly is stupid?
 
2017-09-28 10:33:55 AM  

sdd2000: lennavan: ox45tallboy: lennavan: You can't figure out how a Russian hacking computers in the US connected to the internet is harder than hacking computers in the US NOT connected to the internet?

Do you know what I love about HackerCon? Their method of determing "Hacker of the Year".

They use a stard Diebold voting machine, like those used across the country. They leave it in booth with a curtain on it. It's not connected to the network at all. You register to get on the ballot, and at a certain point, you the polls open and you line up and each person gets 3 minutes with the curtain shut.

And while voting machines aren't connected to the Internet while voting is going on, they often are for uploading the "official ballot" as well as any firmware updates, and the vote totals after the polls closed are often sent over the Internet.

The bolded part of course is the significant difference between a Russian hacking a polling machine and a Russian hacking someone's email.  So equating the difficulty level of the two would be an exceptionally stupid thing to do, right?

Because no undocumented immigrants ever voted- right? Their goes the Dotard-in-chief and Kris Kobach's narrative.


Whats illegal immigrant voting got to do with the digital security of voting machines? Outside of both of them being related to elections in some way.
 
2017-09-28 10:35:09 AM  
hey subby, catch

media.giphy.com
 
2017-09-28 10:37:35 AM  

Glitchwerks: Lucky LaRue: Chris Ween: So, the Russians are super crafty...enough to steal an election...and to hack the emails of the DNC, to hack at but not get into the voting machines, to hide Wisconsin from Hillary Clinton...but they won't see this story?

Need a Laurence O'Donnel meltdown gif here.

[img.fark.net image 800x420]

[_ image _x_]
WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

WUB WUB WUB

WUB WUB WUB


imagehost7.online-image-editor.com
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report