Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
NASA moves to the Supreme Court
Rank: Chief Joined: 5/9/2007 Posts: 13,095
|
Lolest! wrote:washiku wrote:Access Granted Good. Very good I thought so too. There wont be "They denied us the only proof we had bla bla bla..."
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/21/2008 Posts: 2,490
|
Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? The man who marries a beautiful woman, and the farmer who grows corn by the roadside have the same problem
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/18/2011 Posts: 12,069 Location: Kianjokoma
|
ZZE123 wrote:Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? Presidential only
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/16/2012 Posts: 661
|
Gathige wrote:gmg wrote:Restricted access. However no hacker ever leaves audit trail so inakaa hapo wamejinasa. If i were NASA, i would focus on the Forms 34s forensics and smoke fraud there. Going by the delay by the Judges to deliver this ruling last, looks like they are not really going to delve deep in IT murky waters and wants an easy route. The timelines of 5.00pm tomorrow fr both the IT and Forms verification limits what can be done, and best is to concentrate on forms where it is easier to pick manenos. Ngatia says he is ready to go straight away, an indication he is lease interested in other matters. Taking a wild guess here... Orengo and Co. aren't as clueless as the summations here and on SM look like. To prove their case all needed are afew pointers for the judges; - If forms (scanned) were sent after the results were transmitted. Indications by IEBC had been these are transmitted together. - Are the sent/scanned forms same as the physical ones presented by IEBC to the petitioner and the court too? - When did the results start coming in to the IEBC systems ? Not much IT jargon is needed to be spewed for the judges. If there are various discrepancies between the scanned forms and the physical forms that will form a very strong basis for Orengo & Co. If the petitioners deal with the issues of system integrity they will be dismissed at 5:05pm tomorrow. Live and learn; and don’t forget, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 4/15/2009 Posts: 371
|
Museveni wrote:Gathige wrote:gmg wrote:Restricted access. However no hacker ever leaves audit trail so inakaa hapo wamejinasa. If i were NASA, i would focus on the Forms 34s forensics and smoke fraud there. Going by the delay by the Judges to deliver this ruling last, looks like they are not really going to delve deep in IT murky waters and wants an easy route. The timelines of 5.00pm tomorrow fr both the IT and Forms verification limits what can be done, and best is to concentrate on forms where it is easier to pick manenos. Ngatia says he is ready to go straight away, an indication he is lease interested in other matters. Taking a wild guess here... Orengo and Co. aren't as clueless as the summations here and on SM look like. To prove their case all needed are afew pointers for the judges; - If forms (scanned) were sent after the results were transmitted. Indications by IEBC had been these are transmitted together. - Are the sent/scanned forms same as the physical ones presented by IEBC to the petitioner and the court too? - When did the results start coming in to the IEBC systems ? Not much IT jargon is needed to be spewed for the judges. If there are various discrepancies between the scanned forms and the physical forms that will form a very strong basis for Orengo & Co. If the petitioners deal with the issues of system integrity they will be dismissed at 5:05pm tomorrow. You don't need access to the serve to view the scanned forms. Everyone has access to the scanned forms. They just need to compare these scanned forms with the certified hard copies. If the results arrived to the server before the scanned forms arrive, it is expainable. The scanned form may delay due to availability of good 2G/3G data speeds.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/5/2010 Posts: 2,061 Location: Nairobi
|
washiku wrote:Lolest! wrote:washiku wrote:Access Granted Good. Very good I thought so too. There wont be "They denied us the only proof we had bla bla bla..." I wonder if NASA compiled a list of what they want from IEBC ....  What on earth will they do with the firewall used to protect KIEMS? Or the operating system, or certified copies of penetration tests? First, a firewall can be hardware based, software based or both. It would be hilarious to see a techie hand over a rack server to NASA's IT guy for analysis, or some PCIe cards ...or a zip file containing some .exe files, a disc with a copy of Linux. Sound weird? Cause it is. These items are useless as sources of evidence. They do not contain any data. In the case of software, the files are compiled and executable,...illegible to humans,..the logic there-in can only be accessed by the most hardcore of IT engineers using advanced tools (decompilers/disassemblers)..would take weeks and any explanations would simply be miles over the heads of judges and the general public...assuming there was mischief anyway. I hope this is not NASAs strategy Comedy! Only the polling station list, the forms and user account audit trails hold some small hope for the NASA team.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,822 Location: Nairobi
|
My assessment is that they are hinging their case on PROCESS or lack of following of PROCESS! they want to gain access to the RTS to show that images of Form 34A were not transmitted together with results. they want to say the results 'data' sent was not from Form 34A. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 2/9/2012 Posts: 576
|
Lolest! wrote:ZZE123 wrote:Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? Presidential only It can open a can of worms,remember there are losers yet to file their petitions.So How the SCOK rules can give ground for their petition For example if SCOK rules that the Ballot papers failed the required standard eg sucurity wise..The other petioners will use that Africa belongs to Africans.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/21/2008 Posts: 2,490
|
wazuaguest wrote:Lolest! wrote:ZZE123 wrote:Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? Presidential only It can open a can of worms,remember there are losers are yet to file their petitions.So How the SCOK rules can give ground for their petition For example if SCOK rules that the Ballot papers failed the required standard eg sucurity wise..The other petioners will use that Personally I think kama kinarudiwa, kirudiwe kyotee!!! The man who marries a beautiful woman, and the farmer who grows corn by the roadside have the same problem
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/16/2012 Posts: 661
|
Caveman wrote:Museveni wrote:Gathige wrote:gmg wrote:Restricted access. However no hacker ever leaves audit trail so inakaa hapo wamejinasa. If i were NASA, i would focus on the Forms 34s forensics and smoke fraud there. Going by the delay by the Judges to deliver this ruling last, looks like they are not really going to delve deep in IT murky waters and wants an easy route. The timelines of 5.00pm tomorrow fr both the IT and Forms verification limits what can be done, and best is to concentrate on forms where it is easier to pick manenos. Ngatia says he is ready to go straight away, an indication he is lease interested in other matters. Taking a wild guess here... Orengo and Co. aren't as clueless as the summations here and on SM look like. To prove their case all needed are afew pointers for the judges; - If forms (scanned) were sent after the results were transmitted. Indications by IEBC had been these are transmitted together. - Are the sent/scanned forms same as the physical ones presented by IEBC to the petitioner and the court too? - When did the results start coming in to the IEBC systems ? Not much IT jargon is needed to be spewed for the judges. If there are various discrepancies between the scanned forms and the physical forms that will form a very strong basis for Orengo & Co. If the petitioners deal with the issues of system integrity they will be dismissed at 5:05pm tomorrow. You don't need access to the serve to view the scanned forms. Everyone has access to the scanned forms. They just need to compare these scanned forms with the certified hard copies. If the results arrived to the server before the scanned forms arrive, it is expainable. The scanned form may delay due to availability of good 2G/3G data speeds. To view when the forms arrived and when the text arrived you do need the server logs for that. As well as the data that arrived. If there are any modifications to any data the logs should be sufficient to indicate when modification was done. That should settle the matter as requested. Not holding brief for any of the parties. Live and learn; and don’t forget, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/16/2012 Posts: 661
|
ZZE123 wrote:wazuaguest wrote:Lolest! wrote:ZZE123 wrote:Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? Presidential only It can open a can of worms,remember there are losers are yet to file their petitions.So How the SCOK rules can give ground for their petition For example if SCOK rules that the Ballot papers failed the required standard eg sucurity wise..The other petioners will use that Personally I think kama kinarudiwa, kirudiwe kyotee!!! There were six independent elections on 8/8! Only one has been disputed, the presidential election. Live and learn; and don’t forget, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/8/2013 Posts: 4,068 Location: At Large.
|
masukuma wrote:My assessment is that they are hinging their case on PROCESS or lack of following of PROCESS! they want to gain access to the RTS to show that images of Form 34A were not transmitted together with results. they want to say the results 'data' sent was not from Form 34A. @Mamboga...please comment on that Bar code thing that Orengo introduced.The "bomb shell" as it were. Love is beautiful and so are those who share it.With Love, Marriage is an amazing event in ones life time, the foundation of joy, happiness and success.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/5/2010 Posts: 2,061 Location: Nairobi
|
Museveni wrote:Caveman wrote:Museveni wrote:Gathige wrote:gmg wrote:Restricted access. However no hacker ever leaves audit trail so inakaa hapo wamejinasa. If i were NASA, i would focus on the Forms 34s forensics and smoke fraud there. Going by the delay by the Judges to deliver this ruling last, looks like they are not really going to delve deep in IT murky waters and wants an easy route. The timelines of 5.00pm tomorrow fr both the IT and Forms verification limits what can be done, and best is to concentrate on forms where it is easier to pick manenos. Ngatia says he is ready to go straight away, an indication he is lease interested in other matters. Taking a wild guess here... Orengo and Co. aren't as clueless as the summations here and on SM look like. To prove their case all needed are afew pointers for the judges; - If forms (scanned) were sent after the results were transmitted. Indications by IEBC had been these are transmitted together. - Are the sent/scanned forms same as the physical ones presented by IEBC to the petitioner and the court too? - When did the results start coming in to the IEBC systems ? Not much IT jargon is needed to be spewed for the judges. If there are various discrepancies between the scanned forms and the physical forms that will form a very strong basis for Orengo & Co. If the petitioners deal with the issues of system integrity they will be dismissed at 5:05pm tomorrow. You don't need access to the serve to view the scanned forms. Everyone has access to the scanned forms. They just need to compare these scanned forms with the certified hard copies. If the results arrived to the server before the scanned forms arrive, it is expainable. The scanned form may delay due to availability of good 2G/3G data speeds. To view when the forms arrived and when the text arrived you do need the server logs for that. As well as the data that arrived. If there are any modifications to any data the logs should be sufficient to indicate when modification was done. That should settle the matter as requested. Not holding brief for any of the parties. In the end, will it matter? Were the final results tallied from the electronic submissions or the forms? I think the Maraga court is just entertaining this to (i) avoid criticism and seem fair (ii) defuse any fuel that NASA might later deploy for mass protests from appearance of directives that seem harsh even if they are procedurally correct Let the show continue ..
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 10/29/2008 Posts: 1,566
|
Orengo now seems to be saying, even though the numbers indicate that we as NASA lost the elections, the process had multiple issues albeit minor. He hence wants the court to rely on those issues (mostly clerical issues) nullify the election. Clerical errors can never be eliminated in any such extensive human undertaking. I am sure even the NASA petition paperwork contains clerical issues. Heck even the court ruling is likely to contain clerical issues. As a matter of fact, this morning the CJ had to correct an issues arising from the ruling the court issued yesterday evening in relation to AG Githu Mungai amicus curiae scope. Isuni yilu yi maa me muyo - ni Mbisuu
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/16/2012 Posts: 661
|
quicksand wrote:Museveni wrote:Caveman wrote:Museveni wrote:Gathige wrote:gmg wrote:Restricted access. However no hacker ever leaves audit trail so inakaa hapo wamejinasa. If i were NASA, i would focus on the Forms 34s forensics and smoke fraud there. Going by the delay by the Judges to deliver this ruling last, looks like they are not really going to delve deep in IT murky waters and wants an easy route. The timelines of 5.00pm tomorrow fr both the IT and Forms verification limits what can be done, and best is to concentrate on forms where it is easier to pick manenos. Ngatia says he is ready to go straight away, an indication he is lease interested in other matters. Taking a wild guess here... Orengo and Co. aren't as clueless as the summations here and on SM look like. To prove their case all needed are afew pointers for the judges; - If forms (scanned) were sent after the results were transmitted. Indications by IEBC had been these are transmitted together. - Are the sent/scanned forms same as the physical ones presented by IEBC to the petitioner and the court too? - When did the results start coming in to the IEBC systems ? Not much IT jargon is needed to be spewed for the judges. If there are various discrepancies between the scanned forms and the physical forms that will form a very strong basis for Orengo & Co. If the petitioners deal with the issues of system integrity they will be dismissed at 5:05pm tomorrow. You don't need access to the serve to view the scanned forms. Everyone has access to the scanned forms. They just need to compare these scanned forms with the certified hard copies. If the results arrived to the server before the scanned forms arrive, it is expainable. The scanned form may delay due to availability of good 2G/3G data speeds. To view when the forms arrived and when the text arrived you do need the server logs for that. As well as the data that arrived. If there are any modifications to any data the logs should be sufficient to indicate when modification was done. That should settle the matter as requested. Not holding brief for any of the parties. In the end, will it matter? Were the final results tallied from the electronic submissions or the forms? I think the Maraga court is just entertaining this to (i) avoid criticism and seem fair (ii) defuse any fuel that NASA might later deploy for mass protests from appearance of directives that seem harsh even if they are procedurally correct Let the show continue .. Exactly. And it goes a long way to be just. Bring memories of the parable of Solomon and the two mothers. NASA has just been handed the sword. The baby is IEBC. On Friday wait for a Solomonic ruling Live and learn; and don’t forget, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,822 Location: Nairobi
|
Bigchick wrote:masukuma wrote:My assessment is that they are hinging their case on PROCESS or lack of following of PROCESS! they want to gain access to the RTS to show that images of Form 34A were not transmitted together with results. they want to say the results 'data' sent was not from Form 34A. @Mamboga...please comment on that Bar code thing that Orengo introduced.The "bomb shell" as it were. I don't know about the operational aspects of the process. Inakaa walifanya kazi kijua kali "operations" wise. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 12/6/2008 Posts: 3,568
|
I don't know how many time the "lady killer" fellow from IEBC will have to explain to those jingas and some dear "slow" wazuan the the THE LAW, in Kenya is that the Official Presidential result is the one pronounced BY MOUTH by the returning officer at the polling station, then the agents verify by signing the form take a "mbicha" (jpg or img file) that is a PICTURE FILE of it, and send a similar sms, that is a DIGITAL FILE, with the same columns (although they can be some very small mistakes just like a fool who send money to the wrong number, but remember they also have a picture of it in case of anything). This DIGITAL SMS is then used by the system to create a digital tally, which is almost similar to the manual form, or the PICTURE (except for the few mistakes), the pictures cannot be tallied, and the verbal announcement cannot be tallied, but the agents have signed to confirm the similarity, and taken a mbicha which matters the most after what the R.O "shouted" in the hall. If they are any differences between what the R.O shouted, what the agents in the hall heard him shout, then record on a form all sign physically and then send "mbicha" then make a similar sms to assist in digital tallying, then confirm with the original "mbichad" form. That is the LAW. What are this FOOLS poking their heads inside a computer for? Kuna kitu kama ujinga ya kupindukia!!! Ras Kienyeji Man
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/18/2011 Posts: 12,069 Location: Kianjokoma
|
Quote:
In the end, will it matter? Were the final results tallied from the electronic submissions or the forms?
I think the Maraga court is just entertaining this to (i) avoid criticism and seem fair (ii) defuse any fuel that NASA might later deploy for mass protests from appearance of directives that seem harsh even if they are procedurally correct
Let the show continue ..
I think Nasa are not in court to win the case It's to convince supporters that the election was flawed. Then have them charged for the next round of Monday demos to remove IEBC, Supreme Court, change electoral laws to maybe include an electoral college as recently espoused by Omtata. In this college system, whoever wins a county's votes, wins all the county's electors' votes like in the US Brace for it guys, coming soon
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 6/8/2010 Posts: 1,732
|
I just thought i heard CJ say that its not NASA IT guru to get access to server but the court will appoint someone to do that, thats why @chilobae was smiling at the ruling Life is an endless adventure
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/3/2007 Posts: 1,635
|
Lolest! wrote:ZZE123 wrote:Someone wake me up when the final ruling is made… the only thing I wonder is if the court rules we need to repeat the elections, will we do President only or full elections? Presidential only Last week I met up with some Jumbiree agents who made a lot of money during the erections. They are praying ati kirudiwo tena  "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
NASA moves to the Supreme Court
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|