Feeds

Senate leader explains poll “hack”

Evil cookies take the biscuit

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Intelligent flash storage arrays

Senator Frist's office has elaborated on its explanation of why it pulled a website poll about the Iraq war last week. We could find no evidence of a security breach at the Senate, although this was the primary reason suggested by a Frist spokesperson on Friday. In fact, the poll was hosted outside the Senate firewall, his office now confirms.

The poll was discovered by bloggers, including Tom Tomorrow, who linked to the poll while it was showing a majority in favor of the war. By the time the poll was pulled, the vote count had swung to the Noes.

"Our computer guy has identified one individual who voted 8,700 times," the spokesperson told us today. Apparently, the software deleted the cookie and voted again.

So why not simply discard the 8,700 suspect votes?

"We suspended the poll because it had been tampered with," he said. "If those votes came from 8,700 unique users we would not have had to suspend the poll."

Well, quite. Although it doesn't really answer the question of why those 8,700 votes weren't discarded, and the good votes allowed to count.

It's certainly a puzzle. Previous polls on the Frist website explain that the system detected and disallowed multiple voting. To do so effectively it must log a voter's IP address, rather than rely on a cookie.

But what if, as one readers suggested, the "hacker" was using a dial-up connection? Dial-up connections typically allocate different IP numbers each time you connect.

Well, assuming each connection could be completed in 1 minute and 20 seconds, a single dial-up user would need more than eight days to vote 8,700 times, assuming the he didn't sleep, that the ISP had 8,700 numbers to allocate, and that it didn't allocate the same number twice from its pool of IP numbers.

So we can rule that one out.

"We will ensure that this kind of tampering doesn't happen again," said the spokesperson.

Online election ballots, anyone? ®

Related Story

Senate Leader scraps website war poll, blaming hackers

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Lords take revenge on REVENGE PORN publishers
Jilted Johns and Jennies with busy fingers face two years inside
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.