Page 9
Jonday, November 6, 2000
THE BATTALION
euen trade?
'’his rate a J
1 additional
i end to (pi-1
r ote-swapping Websites could affect election; authorities should back off
J ANTED
is aaeptr^i
- assistant. j:-i
690-09W.
ng DJ sJ te
rOpmorcali
30-1:30. Frc'
No phone cad
aalified parHri]
i hours. Peitr:
r son 352W.L-
JCkPrai
ANEOU:!
CYCLE
exhaust. Ires
Vote, 26W6-
3ats, Dogs
makes, ra»6
755.
gray Swtiit
5/each, 364-a
ned with into :|
)3.|i
ATES
ring semes*I
i/2bth, ond
)drm/1btha
260/mo.
, no bills.
aster. Nid
iy. 3bdrm2|
ant paid t
semester r >1
bus routs l
g suNsisr*
ly, new i
:es
.ols-ol* 11 ' 7 '
sount. tr'Y
(6pm4P*l®
Inside H*'
.oweslf® 1 *’
046-6ltf >
"he newest
wave in
American In-
^rnet culture is
[ote-swapping.
Like most new
Jlements of soci
ety, it is under le-
^al fire, specifi-
fally from the
(tate of California.
Vote-swapping is legal under
federal law and should not be
Prohibited by any state’s legal
[iroceedings.
It should be
dewed as an
Igreement be-
Iween citizens to
ichieve their
toals.
Vote-swapping
Concerns the left
[ide of the politi
cal model. Sup-
jorters of
preen Party
:andidate
talph Nader
In toss up
Itates sign up
|o vote for
he Democra-
|ic Party can-
lidate A1
lore.
Their votes are
iwapped for.Nader
rotes in states either
lolidly behind Gore or
Republican Party candi-
late George W. Bush.
This could help Nader toward his
;oal of 5 percent of the popular
'ote, the threshold needed for the
[Green Party to obtain federal match
ing funds for the 2004 presidential
election.
Nadertrader.com encourages
•swappers to “Think locally. Vote
nationally.”
However, the state of California
does not see the vote-swapping phe
nomenon this way.
On Oct. 30, Voteswap2000.com
was closed by California Secretary
of State Bill Jones.
The letter from Jones’ office stat
ed, “The right to free and fair elec
tions is a cornerstone of American
democracy.”
“Any person or entity that tries to
exchange votes or brokers the ex
change of votes will be pursued with
the utmost vigor.”
The basis of closing the site is a
California election law that says
inducing a person to vote a partic-
State helping out Bush.”
American University law pro
fessor Jamie Raskin, whose com
mentary in the Oct. 24 edition of
Slate popularized the idea, has also
implied that Jones’ motivation for
closing the site has Republican
roots.
The creators of the
Voteswap2000.com site have said
they will not relaunch the Web
site, even if political pressure is
eased.
However, numerous other sites.
ular way
is illegal.
This
enables the
state to pros
ecute anyone
who swaps votes.
In a Nov. 1
CNET.com article, attorney Brian
Maas of Sacramento stated, “I
doubt it will hold up in court.
This is a Republican Secretary of
such as Nadertrader.com, continue
operation.
A Justice Department spokesper
son, Chris Watney, said, “In gener
al, it’s a crime to promise voters
anything of value if they vote a cer
tain way. So this system, where
no money is exchanged, is OK.”
Last Thursday, the American Civ
il Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit
against California Secretary of State
Bill Jones.
The ACLU accuses Jones of
creating a climate of fear to inhib
it free speech by accusing Web
sites that promote interstate “vote-
swapping” of criminal activity
that “corrupts the election
process.”
. The suit is on behalf of anoth
er Californian vote-swapping
Website, Voteexchange2000.com,
that shut down for fear of legal
action after the
Voteswap2000.com shutdown.
Despite the situation in Califor
nia, vote-swapping sites have flour
ished in their two-week existence.
Nadertrader.com reported more than
119,437 hits on Oct. 31.
The site Winchell.com states that
almost 5,000 people have signed up
to swap votes on its Website.
Thanks to the Electoral College,
these small amounts of people swap
ping votes could make a big differ-'
ence in the long run.
In 1960 and" 1976, just 12,000 and
9,000 votes, respectively, could have
changed who was elected president.
In this regard, the state of Califor
nia should change its electoral rules
to mimic federal electoral laws that
do not consider it a crime to swap
votes.
The movement of trading votes
boasts a registered number of users
who could, in theory, swing this
election.
However, like most po
litical campaigns the end
‘result of tactics, such
as vote-swapping,
can never be pre
cisely mea
sured and
thus, their
impact
cannot be
totally un
derstood.
In light of this, California should
back off of vote-swapping sites and
their users.
Reid Bader is a junior
political science major.
Mail Call
Student Senate passage
of Bonfire Resolution
jourse.con’ ;
^^meaningless, hypocritical
ID
Jail 1-80#*
$342/n»’ 1
Jail 268-43®
sts.
me $$. cal11
dahomaP
)SS
h Lowe' 8^1
leeks, i
In response to Chad Wagner’s Nov. 3 Mail Call.
After the Bonfire Resolution was passed, I
had a member of the Student Senate come up
to me and ask, “You mean there are people
who do not agree with Bowen?”
He asked the question with all sincerity —
he simply did not know that there were peo
ple who wanted to have a Bonfire this very
year.
It leaves me wondering how it can be that
a senator, a representative of the student
body, simply did not know about opposition
to Bowen.
I hope this was only one person, but I fear
that it was not.
I do not believe that the percentage of
people against the resolution was only 17.4
percent.
I also do not believe that the sources of in
formation on campus painted an accurate pic
ture of the Bonfire situation, including Bowen’s
plan and the other options.
The spread of anti-Keep The Fire Burning
(KTFB) half-truths is only one example of this
perhaps unintentional propaganda campaign.
In my experience, when explained based on
facts, KTFB looked like a very good idea to
most students.
Finally, I find it laughable that the Student
Senate and other organizations call for unity
among the Aggies when they themselves are
passing the motions causing the rifts.
They start the arguments and then blame
others for continuing them.
Considering the controversy that it possibly
knew would come about — at least, it should
have known if they had listened to their con
stituency — the Student Senate should have
taken a hands-off approach to the whole is
sue.
What good did it do to pass this resolution?
Absolutely none.
It only ended up casting various groups, in
cluding the Student Senate, into bad light.
In my opinion, the Bonfire Resolution was a
meaningless move that only broadened divi
sions and initiated a slew of mudslinging.
It was a bad move for the Student Senate
and definitely hints at a lack of knowledge of
the wishes of the students of Texas A&M.
Chris Carlin
Class of ’03
Unregulated display of
pornography in campus
dormitories disturbing
Pornography is easily accessed through the
University’s computer network.
Evidently, there is no filter in place.
Porn parties are held in dorm rooms. Doors
are left open, allowing passersby to hear the au
dio, and on-screen views are easily seen from
the hallway.
Some perverts even put the computer
speakers in the doorway so the sounds can
clearly be heard up and down the hall.
I would like to know what the University’s poli- *
cy is by allowing porn to be carried on its system.
Illegal material should be filtered. I request
that someone in authority take a careful review
of this matter.
What is the University’s policy if the porn is
purchased as a videotape or CD and is played
in the dorm room?
I was told there are. smoking and alcohol reg
ulation of the dorms.
What rule prohibits pornography and how is
that rule enforced?
Carrilyn Baker
Wichita Falls
Stude”'
99-200"
VIcDof
checks.
The Battalion en
courages letters to the
editor. Letters must be
300 words or less and
Include the author’s
name, class and phone
number.
The opinion editor re
serves the right to edit
letters for length, style,
and accuracy.
Letters may be sub
mitted in person at 014
Reed McDonald with a
valid student ID. Letters
may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
014 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
1111TAMU
College Station, Texas
77843
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (979) 845-2647
E-mail: battletters@hot-
mail.com
Columns and letters
appearing in The Battalion
express the opinion of the
authors only.
They do not neces
sarily reflect the opinion
of other Battalion staff
members, the Texas
A&M student body, re
gents, administrators,
faculty or staff.
Hacker, Schmacker
Actions promote improved network security
W ith the recent breach of Microsoft’s net
work and the possible seizure of valuable
source codes of Microsoft programs, the
activities of hackers have been brought back into
the media spotlight. Hackers have been a hot
topic over the past few months as several major
Websites like CNET and Yahoo were temporari
ly shutdown when their servers were over
loaded, producing a “denial of service.”
, In truth, throughout the history of personal
computers (which were invented by hackers), the term “hacker” has
been viewed negatively in public opinion. Hackers have been seen as
malicious self-assured parasites engaging in criminal activity. While
this is a fair description of some hackers, it overlooks the benefit to
the digital world.
As society continues to become more dependent on computers
and an increasing number of people put their faith in network securi
ty, it is necessary to clear up some misconceptions about hackers.
First off, it is important to note that most people involved in the
so-called “computer underground” make a very sharp distinction be
tween the terms “hacker” and “cracker.”
In his book Maximum Security: A Hacker’s Guide to Protecting
Your Internet Site and Network, Mark Taber outlines the difference
between the two types of people. Taber writes that hackers are peopfe
who are “intensely interested in the ... workings of any computer op
erating system” and who constantly explore data systems for weak
points, gaining knowledge in the process.
A cracker, on the other hand, is “a person who breaks into or oth
erwise violates the system integrity of remote machines, with mali
cious intent.” While this may seem empty rhetoric put out by the ac
cused to arbitrarily separate themselves from the true criminals, it is
an important distinction most people do not make.
For the most part, hackers (used in the broad sense) are not out to
steal Microsoft’s source code for profit or shut down Yahoo, causing
stock-holders to lose thousands of dollars by the minute.
Anybody who, as a kid, took apart Transformers figures or even
Dad’s electric drill knows the thrill of discovery. Learning how
things work, be it a 7-inch figure of Megatron or a complex, multi-
hubbed T3-routed computer network, is what makes most hackers
tick. Crackers are out to break the world; hackers just want to know
how it works.
As society continues to become more de
pendent on computers and an increasing
number of people put their faith in network
security it is necessary to clear up some
misconceptions about hackers.
Another major misconception is the motivation people have for
breaking into computer networks.
The reward for most hackers is not embarrassing sites like Yahoo
and making them lose revenue, but rather the accomplishipent of
knowing that they were able to find a loophole in a network’s securi
ty and beat the best efforts of highly paid company programmers.
Viewed in that context, hackers usually do not consider their ac
tivities illegal, even though those actions, in legal terms and prece
dents, are. In hackers’ opinion, the crime is not that they broke into a
network, but rather that they were able to break into it in the first
place.
CNN recently held an email interview with the editor of 2600, a
hacker Website and quarterly magazine. The editor, who goes by the
aliens Emmanuel Goldstein, described hackers as having an “idealistic
naivete.” Rather than malevolence, the idealistic notion that every
last network should be completely impenetrable drives a hacker to
find out if one really is.
In his emails to CNN, Goldstein used the example of cracking on
line privacy to support this kinder view of hackers’ motivation. He
wrote “It’s interesting that hackers are the ones who are-always push
ing strong encryption” and “if we were truly interested in getting into
everyone’s personal affairs, it’s unlikely we’d try and show them
how to stay secure.”
A dam without a river behind it will show no cracks. Then, when
the water does flow, all its weak points become apparent.
The crackers who broke into Microsoft and conducted the “denial
of service” attacks should be prosecuted. Their actions go beyond cu
riosity and cross into criminality.
However, the world needs hackers. As data transmissions evolve
from pictures of the grandkids to more valuable information like credit
card numbers, the need for networks to be tested by people outside of
the networks increases. A digital society cannot rely on those who built
a network to find all its loopholes.
The future of hackers and established Websites could be prosper
ous for both. As one anonymous hacker put it in an interview with
ZDTV, the two sides need to communicate with each other. Hackers
run their own Websites and hold conventions that are rarely attended
by non-hackers.
As record companies have found out in their legal battle against
online piracy, it is better to embrace new technology than.^Jestroy it.
If online companies, while prosecuting crackers, also learn what they
can from the action of hackers, they, and society as a whole, will con
tinue to see benefits.
Eric Dickens is a senior English major.
Al or Dubya...
Maybe Ralph or Pat...
Could care less...
Have your voice heard.
In conjunction with tomorrow’s general election, The Battal
ion invites the Texas A&M student body to share its vibws on
the race for president.
Students are.urged to submit letters to the editor out:;, .mg
who they are voting for and for what reasons.
In this case, letters must be 200 words or less and include
the author’s name, class and phone number. The opinion editor
reserves the right to edit letters for length, style and accuracy.
Considering length constraints, it is recommended that the au
thor focus his or her letter on one or two primary campaign issues.