We need to go back to hand-counted paper ballots. It may take longer, but it’s verifiable and archivable. Now we find out about machines that allow multiple votes and more of Diebold’s brazen actions.
Several computer scientists said Wednesday that the vulnerability found in all touch-screen machines sold by Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems was not especially great because using the yellow button for vote fraud would require reaching far behind the voting machine twice and triggering two beeps.
According to the article, the risk is downplayed because of the button location and audible note. IMNSHO that’s just whistling in the dark, as people are quite inventive.
Now we also find out Diebold edited the information from official government reports on their performance (I’m shocked, shocked I tell you).
In September, 2003 Linda Lamone, the Administrator of Maryland’s State Board of Elections and President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) hands over a critical study on the security of the Diebold Election Systems machines that count all of Maryland’s votes.
The study, dated September 17, 2003, is the response to research performed by Johns Hopkins University Computer Science Professor Avi Rubin citing severe security flaws on the Diebold touch screen machines, including a surprising lack of security, (encryption), on the memory cards. Maryland sought to ascertain whether their Diebold Touch Screen machines were, in fact, safe for Maryland voters to use.
First, SAIC would not be allowed to even look at the source code, the heart and guts of electronic voting machines. Second, they would be allowed to go through the SAIC Report, line by line, and redact anything and everything that they felt was proprietary, had a potential for security breaches or could provide a roadmap for anyone who wanted to compromise the system.
So here we go into another election day where we aren’t sure if our votes will be counted properly.
We already know that you can get around the audible beep by plugging in a set of headphones. The headphone jack is easil accesible, I seem to remember.
I really want the voting methods to be fair, but if they arent, they should go democrat, to start balancing out the defrauding that the republicans had in 2000 2002 and 2004.
2,
That means all you need is need a wired jack, so you can get it through even if they decide to screen for headsets.
So what is wrong with ink-marked paper ballots (not punch cards) counted by a scoring machine which can be recounted by humans?
What’s wrong with paper ballots? In Cannukistan we’ve used paper ballots for all elections. Tabulation is usually done just before you go to bed… And that’s ’cause of BC being so far behind in time zones. And anyone can observe the vote count. You just hang out in the voting area and watch the count!
In out municipal elections we use an electronic reader. Fill in the arrow next to your candidate and slide it into the machine. Of course, voter turnout in a municipal election here is pretty poor. My wife has NEVER voted in a municipal election… I always vote. And I always ask about what safeguards are in place before I do so.
Diebold isn’t in the business of delivering fair elections to their shareholders. This is privatization in all its holy glory.
4.
Works for me.
as long as you vote for the ‘right’ party, you have nothing worry about! As Stalin said, its not about who votes, but who counts the votes.
…Days before the election, state officials have learned that California’s most widely used electronic voting machines feature a button in back that can allow someone to vote multiple times….
Do the ATM’s have these features? 🙂
Oregon’s vote by mail is nice, because I don’t have to see the smirk on the election official’s face – when they see me casting a vote they will shred, or alter, later…
So what is wrong with ink-marked paper ballots (not punch cards) counted by a scoring machine which can be recounted by humans?
D00D! That’s so 20th Century (Okay 19th).
Besides, we’d have to go back to actually doing some WORK to steal elections.
J/P=?
I love when they try to argue that the source code can’t be revealed to protect their security or their IP.
Hello, copyright laws would prevent others from stealing their code, and any security which depends on obscuring the code is bad security.
I’m pretty sure they teach that in any intro to security class.
Paper is good. It is biodegradable and recyclable. They are easy to use and readable later.
Let’s get rid of polling places, mail everyone their ballot, drop off their ballot or mail it in, have a machine scan and count the ballots, and if any questions arises a manual recount can be done….
Wait, we already did that, when are the other 49 going to catch up? (I’m not sure if all the counties use the same optical reader system, but in my county it’s just fill in the arrow, nice and simple, optical readers are fairly accurate, and there’s always the manual backup)
The first company isn’t Diebold, it’s Hugo Chavez.
#14 – that’s great for those lucky enough to have addresses…
I’m tech savvy, but I bank at a bank for a reason, and i vote at a voting place for reason too. I like being physically connected to the institutions I am involved with. There is an added level of security in my mind when I can punch a ballot and drop it in a box, or when a bank teller hands me a reciept.
I am tired of government increasing the distance between me and the process. Keep polling places open.
If the current batch of voting machines were cars, toys, tools or fishing tackle, most of them would have been recalled by now, by the manufacturer, to protect themselves from liability and bad press. And to not give their competitors the opportunity to honestly say, “our competitors product is total unsecured crap, that will jeapordize the the integrity of your elections”. Yet, these voting machines less tamper-proof than electronic cash registers, seem to have an endless supply of “get out of jail free” cards. Other than in Maryland and a handful of other states, the agencies with over-sight responsibilities on these machines seem to be only interested in protecting their image, by not highlighting issues regarding systems they selected. So do your part to hound media outlets about covering the subject until it is resolved. Refuse to click on or buy another sponsored link or product, until the media covers this topic like it was Diebold-gelina.
Don’t you guys know? Being able to rig the election is now one of the qualifications needed to get into office. Was part of the Competent Corruption bill all those years ago.
None of this would be an issue if the computer were used simply as an input device that then generated a printed paper ballot for. That would solve most of the current problems without creating a bunch of new ones.
We are making this more complex than it needs to be.
Donovan
AB CD is right at least the republicans hired an American company to fix the election.
Electronic voting machines have many benefits…
* Cost of many millions for the machines (many many many millions).
* Not quite as reliable as paper (ok, much much less reliable).
* May or may not leave a paper trail (they have not been so far).
* Easier to commit fraud with (recent stories of security issues).
* Faster vote count (if you don’t count the time need for a recount since no one in their right mind would trust the counts obtained by this method).
Steve
This entire fiasco was created by idiots who thought they could overcome human stupidity with high tech. IT DON’T GET ANY SIMPLER THAN A PUNCH BALLOT!
This country has gone insane — spending billions trying to fix problems that don’t exist. From fingernail clippers on airplanes to hanging chads on ballots, we have collectively lost all ability to differentiate between mountains and mole hills.
With all the money and brainpower expended so far on this issue, one would think that some cheap, simple, straightforward solution would emerge. Maybe one has, but I have yet to see it.
If I go down to my local electronics surplus store with $50, I can go back to my garage and construct a device that will easily and reliably address the punchcard ballot issue.
The voter punches their selections and removes the card. They then insert the card into a slot (tapered for ease of insertion), the card is drawn by rubber tractors between two knives which are spaced at the exact thickness of the card. Thus any “hanging chads” are removed. The card then halts between a matrix of led/photocell pairs, one for each possible punch position, where it’s checked for one and only one punch per row. If it passes, it’s returned to the voter, if not, it proceeds the other way out – to a shredder.
Adding a simple dumb display panel for the voter to verify his selections is trivial.
Now, how goddamn difficult is this? The card is confirmed as valid before the voter leaves the booth, and the entire punchcard-voting infrastructure remains intact and usable. I don’t have to tell you how much money would be saved…
Your mission, should you decide to accept it (or, should you have nothing better to do), is to explain why this wouldn’t work.
And feel free to be as snide and condescending as I usually am…
I work the election in Santa Clara county, one of the counties in California that no longer uses paper ballots, only the Sequoia machines. Until the June primary, we didn’t have a paper trail. Now we do.
I’m a precinct Inspector(i run that polling place)….my number one job is to be voting info officer. I stand or sit and watch the voting machines all day, and the ballot box for people who bring their absentee ballots in to cast them. We use the vote card activation machine system here. No activated card, no vote…the touch screen won’t let you.
The infamous little yellow button……yes, there is one, and yes, you must hold it down for 3 secs or more. I know, I have had to do it. And, if you place an activated card into the slot, it will bring up a ballot. Thats the key, without a new activated card for every ballot, it won’t bring up a new voting screen. If a voter says, their screen won’t work, or won’t change to the next page, I have to go over, press the button, it will then eject the activation card, invalidate the ballot in progress, then go to not in use mode. The voter must then take their card back to the clerk and have a new activated card made, THEN they can get a machine to bring up a voting screen. The invalidated ballot is also invalidated on the paper trail and I have to make note of the fact on an activity log.
We set up our machines, so that the backs are against a wall or window. The machines have wings around the screen to prevent glare and others seeing how you vote, there is no way to reach the button from the front of the machine, you would have to leave the screen and go to the rear of the machine to press the button. But then, all thats going to happens is, it will eject your activation card and invalidate your ballot. All partial ballots are invalidated by the machine, before it will allow another voting screen to come up. If you completed a ballot, the second you hit the spot marked …*finished*** your card is automatically ejected and the machine will no longer accept that card.
Some counties don’t use the activation cards to access the touch screen ballot. They must watch the machines at all times, because from what I was told when I first trained, is that what this article discribes can happen. There is only 1 or 2 small counties that don’t use the activation card system and they are changing or have changed.
Nothing is perfect. And if I had my way, we would use plain old paper ballots, marked by hand and counted by hand.
Another thing this article dosen’t mention is this….precincts have poll watchers, from at least the 2 big parties, and maybe 1 or 2 from the smaller parties, add that to the fact that most polling places have 5 workers, 4 clerks and a precinct Inspector and only 5 machines, 6 at most to watch. It’s damn hard to scratch your butt in a polling place without someone seeing….let alone go behind a machine and run off a new ballot every 4 to 6 minutes.
The one good thing about all these touch screen scares is this…..you don’t hear talk of computor voting any more.
Oh, and you guys up in Oregon….I wouldn’t be to smug…..these days, the largest and easiest way to screw with vote counts is the absentee ballot. That is a fact.
The chick in the picture gives all new meaning to the phrase “deep throat”!