Anyone using an iPhone should carefully read this article and consider its ramification.

Make no mistake, we love computers, especially where they are employed to give a measure of independence to people with disabilities.

They are remarkably fluid and can have their behavior changed on the fly possibly without leaving any forensic evidence of their previous configuration.

This makes us apprehensive of the potential for computerized election machines to be tampered with in ways that defy subsequent investigation. Indeed we are deeply troubled by radio reports that some of the new touch screen devices may be pre-selecting candidates of one party rather than presenting voters with a blank slate.

Equally troubling are reports of erroneous instructions on how to use the new voting machines and human factors issues that could lead voters to hit ‘enter’ after accidentally entering an over-vote, which would have the effect of disenfranchising them! Likewise, on other machines, there is a simple counter that indicates that some mark was scanned without any feedback for the voter to know that all of his or her ballot selections were picked up in the vote.

Moreover, given the ease with which a technically competent criminally minded election worker might be able to tamper with tomorrow’s election, we urge you to exercise extreme caution in using whatever configuration of voting device you are confronted with. Also, bring a camera or cell phone in with you if it is permitted so you can snap a photo to create a record of any screen layout that you think might have been tampered with and immediately raise the alarm with election officials.

Beyond the sheer cost of replacing our old fashioned voting machines with these new computerized systems — for non-disabled voters — their user interfaces are unduly complicated. Filling in little bubbles with markers will take much longer, be harder for our seniors, and be more stressful for all compared to the ease of pulling a physical lever in older voting machines. Moreover, those older mechanical systems were infinitely more tamper resistant than anything driven by a computer chip.

For those with disabilities we really like the new multi-modal systems and it makes perfect sense to have one of them at each polling place. But for the rest of us, lever based systems with their mechanical interlock to prevent over voting and the direct one-to-one correspondence between lever positions and reliably recorded votes have yet to be matched by the newer designs.

Newer is not always better and adding a computer to the mix doesn’t necessarily make for a better solution.

We urge you to read this stunning analysis of Apple’s patent application for a technique to personally identify its users through covert activation of a device’s audio and video capture hardware to identify the location of your Apple device, photograph its surroundings, possibly monitor your heart beat, record your communications and online activity, and disable your system (by wiping your device after sequestering your data on its remote servers) if you engage in “unauthorized” uses of your device even if they are perfectly legal.

This takes Steve Jobs’ transformation into a Big Brother figure to a whole new level.

Of course, in all fairness to Apple, this capability is ostensibly contemplated to recover stolen iPhones. Moreover, since Patents are a Monopoly Right to Prevent Others from Using a Technology, Apple could put a positive spin on this PR disaster by promising to not exercise this patent themselves and to use it to prevent other manufacturers from spying on their End Users, further insuring that Users are not punished for legally customizing systems that they have purchased.

But if the patent is really driven by such beneficence, Apple needs to make its intentions clear, ideally by opening its devices to arbitrary user-installed software to obviate the need for jail-breaking in the first place.

Given the level of deep reaching control that Mr. Jobs exerts over the company it is hard to believe that a patent of this scope covering such sensitive subject matter would be filed without his personal knowledge and approval.

The application also raises some interesting questions for owners of current Apple devices. Does current Apple hardware support the Spyware functionality contemplated by the patent applications, and if so, is such functionality present in any shipping Apple System Software?

Sadly, we may not longer control that which we own, making the only trustworthy devices non-networked ones.

So until definitive answers are had, End Users must assume that their Apple devices are subject to remote monitoring by corporate spymasters in Cupertino, that their microphones are always recording, and that the indicator lights on their built-in webcams cannot be trusted.

And make no mistake, if such hooks are in place for Apple’s use, it is only a matter of time before black hat hackers discover how to exploit them to look in on your bedroom or office.

We urge the Board of Directors of Apple to do some serious soul searching about what kind of a future they want to live in. No matter how desirable absolute control may seem in the short run, such power is fleeting.

In a matter of months, Android and Windows 7 Tablets will arrive to challenge the iPad. The iPhone is no longer the only game in town, and the Windows 7 and Linux operating systems offer a viable alternative to OS X.

It is not too late for Apple to step back from the precipice, but if it continues to display ever increasing levels of arrogance towards its End Users and Developers alike, a tipping point will be reached that will send the value of Apple stock plunging as its customer base evaporates.

This open source project licensed under the GPL will thoroughly scrub your system of known threats to any platform. Its database of malware signatures is frequently updated and the system has a number of graphical front ends.

A new native port for Windows is still in the works, but there is already an older unsupported ClamAV for Windows and a ClamWin as well as a ClamXav 2.0 Public Beta that runs under the latest release of OS X for Mac Users.

While the various ClamAV GUI’s tend to produce too much low level feedback on what the tool is doing, the system gets the job done which is what really matters most in this space.

Also see Part 1 & Part 2 of this series.

Note however that iAntiVirus won’t catch any non-mac threats, so if someone sends you a file with a windows virus you are still at risk of passing it on to friends. Nevertheless, it will catch known Mac viruses and trojans and since there are fewer of these on the Mac side, the scan will generally run at a good clip.

The company also has a subscription version of the tool with technical support for business users.

Alternatively, all Mac users can look at ClamXav (see tomorrow’s post).

Also see Part 1 & Part 3 of this series.

Anti-Virus software is a must have of modern computing. Regrettably, the commercial subscription service fees to provide this protection can really mount up in the long term.

Fortunately, if Windows is your platform of choice and your Windows variant has already been “activated” or supports installing the Genuine Microsoft Software validation tools (i.e. Windows XP, Vista, and Windows 7), you will be able to download and install Microsoft Security Essentials for free.

Security Essentials will then provide you with up to date anti-virus and malware protection tightly integrated into the Windows update mechanism under an elegant user interface that rivals those of third party vendors.

Also see Part 2 & Part 3 of this series.