Major scientists BUST on Black Box Voting - New York Times pickup

Note: I am not seeing this on the NYT site, though my email said they'll be running a story. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Dammit, I hope they get that story up; either way, it's getting covered. I'll fill you in on who picks up tomorrow.

Ah...I believe I mentioned that the bigs are doing independent corroboration -- is Johns Hopkins University analysis of the ftp site good enough?

Biggest print news outlets include:
NYT
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post
LA Times
Newsday
Time mag
Newsweek mag

I'm not supposed to specify who I'm interviewing with, but so far, five of the above, with multiple contacts from three of them.

There's more to come, expect it to get worse. Excerpt from Johns Hopkins paper --

"Indeed, source code that appears to correspond to a version of Diebold’s voting system appeared recently on the Internet. This appearance, announced by Bev Harris and discussed in her book, Black Box Voting, gives us a unique opportunity to analyze a widely used, paperless DRE system and evaluate the manufacturer’s security claims."

"This unique opportunity for independent scientific analysis of voting system source code demonstrates the fallacy of the closed-source argument for such a critical system. Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts.

We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal.

"Furthermore, we show that even the most serious of our outsider attacks could have been discovered without the source code. In the face of such attacks, the usual worries about insider threats are not the only concerns; outsiders can do the damage. That said, we demonstrate that the insider threat is also quite considerable. We conclude that, as a society, we must carefully consider the risks inherent in electronic voting, as it places our very democracy at risk."

THIS IS FROM:

"Analysis of an Electronic Voting System" by Tadayoshi Kohno, Adam Stubblefield, Aviel D. Rubin and Dan Wallach (the first three at Johns Hopkins University and the latter at Rice). You can find the paper at

http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf

It is my understanding that there will be a related article in the New York Times.

According to the e-mail I received from another top-ranked expert, this is what his take on it is:

The paper does a serious, professional security analysis of the DRE code that purportedly was downloaded from the Diebold FTP site earlier this year. In moderate tones, it is a devastating critique of the security provisions in that code (or lack thereof), documented by quotes from that code.

This paper is essential reading for anyone interested in voting technology and security. It should have great weight in the debate over voter verification and open source.

Let me be one of the first to congratulate! :party: :toast:

Let the games begin!!! :evilgrin:

Hope I was just a little help to your massive and on-rushing project.

"For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal."

I say the Dems in Florida are OWED a few votes. So let's spread the word to some senior centers....

Yeah, Johns Hopkins will do for me. Rice, yeah, you bet!

But then, *I* didn't personally need such validation. I happen to be friends with the people in the know. ;-)

Congratulations, Bev, and a hearty, hearty thank you. Again.

Eloriel

5.3 Tampering with election results
Just as it is possible for an adversary to tamper with the downloading of the ballot definition file (Section 5.1), it is also possible for an adversary to tamper with the uploading of the election results. To make this task even easier for the adversary, we note that although the election results are stored “encrypted” on the voting devices (Section 4.4), the results are sent from the voting devices to the back-end server over an unauthenticated and unencrypted channel. In particular, CTransferResultsDlg::OnTransfer() writes ballot results to an instance of CDL2Archive, which then writes the votes in cleartext to a socket without any cryptographic checksum.

Sending election results in this way over the Internet is a bad idea. Nothing prevents an attacker with access to the network traffic, such as workers at a local ISP, from modifying the data in transit. Such an attacker could, for example, decrease one candidates vote count by n and increase the another candidate’s count by n. Of course, to introduce controlled changes to the votes, the attacker would require some knowledge of the structure of the messages sent from the voting terminals to the back-end server. If the voting terminals use a modem connection directly to the tabulating authority’s network, rather than the Internet, then the risk of such an attack is less, although still not inconsequential. A sophisticated adversary (or employee of the local phone company) could tap the phone line and intercept the communication. All of these adversaries could be easily defeated by properly using standard encryption suites like SSL/TLS, used throughout the World Wide Web for e-commerce security. We are puzzled why such a widely accepted and studied technology is not used by the voting terminals to safely communicate across potentially hostile networks.

It's stupid, incompetent, unprofessional, and begging to be hacked.

I've written cryptosystems. The first thing you do is analyze how you can be attacked, then test, test, test, and reanalyze.

It is NOT possible that this was tested much less certified.

The whole concept of computer balloting is ludicrous.

Yes, this is good enough.....to make most any dissenter eat his shoes! Or my shoes. I don't care!

This is worth going out to buy an actual paper version of the NYT for posteriety.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh........thank you, thank you, thank you Bev!

Way to go gal!! I will make sure all my friends relatives and their pets get the article.

I've been reading your threads as a lurker for quite a while now and it'll good to finally see some motion in the mainstream press. Congratulations and thanks for all the hard work, not least of which seems to have been preparing an attack that could fend off committed naysayers, of which I'm sure there will be many more. Now the real fight begins.

This is AWESOME!

Way to go.

Don't forget to send me those questions. ;)

Good job Bev. You've finally gotten the attention of the "experts." What a tremendous development!

.

**

Go Bev! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Congrats and thanks, Bev!

And to all that have helped!

Way to go!!! This brings a lot of credibility to the project.

YEAH!!!

... to R. Doug Lewis. *smile*

Oh, yeah, with a little note saying, "gee, this stuff compiled, didn't it?"

Cheers, Bev. Good work.

Excellent!!! As a software developer I have been following this issue. It has been appalling. Whoever selected and certified these systems should be tried for treason. It was obvious from the start that these systems were hiding something. Open source is truely the best way to go for critical civil applications.

The question remaining is, did Diebold do this on purpose? Given that Diebold makes ATMs and other high security, transaction based terminal systems, how can they have allowed such bad software practices to go on? It was either intentional, or perhaps all of their stuff is crap. I await their response to the NYT article.

Be careful of that Diebold ATM!

these systems......

A guy .....rather youngish.......Shawn Southworth.

One guy.

... in Colorado, and they seem a lot less shaky (professional testing experience in other engineering areas, etc.), called SysTest. But, I'll bet the GEMS/Diebold stuff went past Southworth at one time or another--probably at very high speed....

Cheers.

none of the manufacturers seem to go to them. Just like the states aren't buying from the most reputable voting machine manufacturers of all: Avante (has had a paper trail in the DRE machine from the start, virtually 100% accuracy); Accupoll (open source and a paper trail to boot).

I say, let's urge our voting machine purchasers to start with manufacturers beginning with the letter "a."

Bev

You never, ever, leave an FTP site unguarded, especially if you're trying to keep your ISO 9000 rating.

I'm suspecting it was mass panic around election time as they discovered the code was wrong, or worse, that they were being hacked.

I only hope there's a way of explaining this to the great unwashed in a form they can understand.

What about a conspiracy to defraud the voters. Could that be possible?

You will never consider that possibility, will you?

Like Bush is incompetent, believed the Niger lies. Like the Wellstone pilot was incompetent, poor flying record. Like the FAA was incompetent on 9/11, when they didn't send the interceptors up.

Like the Blacks and Jews in Florida were incompetent, and they double punched their votes. Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush and Teresa LePore the Butterfly Queen had nothing to do with it - no conspiracy there.

Free yourself, man. Nothing happens in politics by accident.

it's only the beginning of hacking away at a VERY LARGE iceberg.

Fasten your seat belt.

You've really done it!

This is by far the best news I've heard for quite a while!

Dear God,

Give this one LLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEGGGGGGGGGSSSSSSSSS!

Sweet.

Wanna call in again to the radio show?

This article merely reiterates what most of the "detractors" have been saying all along. Namely, that while the Diebold software was horribly designed and contained numerous flaws, there is absolutely no evidence that those flaws were delibrate (see the relevant Rubin quote in the article), and there is no evidence that any elections were actually rigged making use of the flaws.

I'm just happy to see that all the exaggerate talk about this story being "bigger than Watergate" has not prevented serious newpapers like the NYT from highlighting the real concerns here. Its my hope that this will help spur needed reforms like requiring open source software and paper audit trails. If that eventually happens, I believe we will all be happier for it.

....you failed to mention that this report only deals with the small portion of the code that was not in the Zip files! :)

Hold tight, the BEST is yet to come! :evilgrin:

drip, Drip, DRIP, DRIP! :bounce:

LOL!!! :bounce::toast::kick::toast::bounce:

Good to see your crucial work get the attention it deserves. Keep it up! Our free nation depends on it!

There's ole Cathy Cox her own precious self in that photo.

I'm imagining her in prison stripes. Or maybe prison orange? Hmmm, which one, which one. Stripes would be more fun, but orange is probably better for her coloring.

(Sorry, there's a reason, or a bunch of them, I have such animus toward this woman.)

Eloriel

Bwahahahahahahahahahaa! After what she's done to this country (selling these machines for Diebold), she deserves to be the poster child for riggerd elections!!!!!!

Hey, you think maybe Britian Williams' academic career is over yet????

I've wanted to see that manipulating lying creature behind bars for a long time!

on "Rob Georgia" and congratulations to anyone else who has worked on this very, very important issue. If the votes aren't counted fairly in 2004, we haven't got a chance.

Here's to you girrrrls! :toast:

looks like yall might not be 'kooks' after all ;->

the truth is viral, and it is out of containment :bounce: :toast:

peace

Thanks for all your hard work. I'll be getting the paper in the morning! Don't forget I want to know who R Doug Lewis is.

This is great news, Bev. I've had company for a few days and obviously have missed stuff. Guess it would have been rude for me to jump online, but I sure missed it.

Congrats to all you hard working DUers.

Basically tell anyone who won in 2002 that there will be a NEW ELECTION in 2 months. And the original candidates will be on the PAPER ballot!

Betcha we'd get the senate back........

And Jeb would be ousted.....

Do NOT forget DemActivist.

And there were others...and, as you'll see in reading their report, much of it was identified very quickly nearly a month ago RIGHT HERE ON DU -- Now I wish I had all those old threads (wait! I do! On my hard drive!) Well, as this unfolds, I think a little retrospective on the prescience of participants right here at DU will be in order.

You guys are the greatest!

Bev

DEMActivist has a place in my heart as big as a mountain. We all owe her, especially, along with some terrific other folks, a HUGE, HUGE debt of gratitude.

:loveya:

Eloriel

yup, I sure do!

I don't care if my name is EVER associated with this project publicly. I know what the contribution is that I have made, and that's all I care about.

Once again, my only goal was to protect the right to vote and to have that vote counted AS CAST for my children and grandchildren.

Today, we made a giant leap forward in accomplishing that goal.

And you deserve a BIG HUG and a cake and a party and a hip hip hooray!!!!!!!

:-)

Thank you, thank you!!!!!!

The first time I ever came to know who you were.....someone was dogging you about going overboard on the GA election scam. It really BUGGED! How many shoes will they have to eat? Oh well.....bygones be bygones. Thank the good lord. and BE SAFE!

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html

Patrick Schoeb

I went to the technology page, and even on that back page it wasn't one of the featured articles. It was only on the list you get if you link to "all headlines"--this article is a start, I guess. But the NYT sure hid it away. Luckily, it'll be linked in blogs, etc. and move out from there.

Thanks, Bev and DemActivist and all the others! I couldn't help with such things as software code--but wished I could as I watched you all from the sidelines, cheering. Now to get more people to CARE. (I think I'll write an e-mail to Mr. Schwartz asking him why he didn't follow up when Diebold's rep claimed that their machines are "certified." And suggesting a follow-up like, "and what does that entail?" or "Who does that?" or "Who certifies the certifiers?" Questions like that.)

And great news! (From yet another lurker on this issue)

This bit is chortleworthy:

"We're constantly improving it so the technology we have 10 years from now will be better than what we have today," Mr. Richardson said. "We're always open to anything that can improve our systems."

10 years, eh? Sounds like Mr. Richardson has pointy hair.

Congrats to all involved!

File the following under "keen sense of the obvious" -- which few appreciate.

The use of a password-based system for access control presents a scenario, particularly noxious to any bureaucratic organization presuming a separation of duties, where those in possession of a password are not only empowered to use that password to perform their duties but are also empowered to provide others with that same privileged access. Fundamental controls presume an authorizing entity and an authorized entity who are separate. Nominal (business) controls provide reasonable protection against a single person, acting on their own, performing a fraud. Such controls cannot provide reasonable protection against collusion between people having segregated authorizations. When the segregation itself cannot be assured, then the controls become ineffective insofar as a single person, acting with de facto authorization in presumably segregated functions, can effect one-person collusion.

It is more than disturbing to see that these systems have password-based controls to some extent. That's beyond contempt.

... the above:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=114&topic_id=291&mesg_id=291&listing_type=search

Cheers.

It was Scoop (http://www.scoop.co.nz) and they alone who had the courage to publish the ftp site with the full set of documents.

By the way, Diebold lied (again) in its response. The site was taken down Jan. 29. The most recent documents on it were dated Jan 26; there were also documents dated Jan 23, Jan 16, and many, many more, including an odd "repair" file for an election database, dated six days after the November election.

This will keep unraveling.

You CANNOT have mainstream press without mainstream access to the files. I happen to know that at least two other very prestigious universities, and many major media outlets, also downloaded those files. Believe me, there is more to come.

Please take a moment to express your appreciation to Scoop New Zealand, consistently the first and the gutsiest, without whom this would not ever have happened:

alistair@scoop.co.nz

Bev

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html

We Will Tear Down That Wall!

The "Circuits" section will certainly be read by an understanding audience.

Putting this article in a Thursday edition is good news for Bev.

And the title of the article is clear enough for anyone to grok: "Computer Voting Is Open to Easy Fraud, Experts Say."

The editors place all relevant articles near each other on a page or in certain editions as you point out. Yes, there is no doubt this was intentionally placed in Thursday's edition. So let's acknowledge the NYTimes as a "good guy" for the moment. :)

Needless to say, all the hard work, patience and tenacity is paying off. :)

So appreciative and grateful for all that you've done!!!

THANK YOU******

..............ELECTORAL ARMAGEDON!!!........I wish that I could give all of you a big hug!!!...........The irony for me is that I had to watch Congress Critter Harris preside over the House debates regarding Foreign appropriations this week as well as listen to her speech today.......Yuch!!!

Great work Bev!! :toast:

you are all my heroes.....awesome patriots!

RIDERS ON THE STORM!

I know you had help, but you've been running the point on this and have got this thing some serious notice. I will happily circulate these bits of info widely in hopes this is only the beginning.

and it's going out to my reps first thing! Perhaps this recall nonsense will give us an early battle to kill it before 04!!

:toast: :toast:

You deserve an e-hug! Consider it done.

And a :toast: to Bev.

the people of the United States have had everything going against them. In the voting areas, it extends from Katherine Harris to Fox to the thousands who were declared felons, the thousands in FL who were laughed at for being too stupid to vote, the thousands whose votes ended up in closets, the crooked elections officials and not last and not least, the Supreme Court - the ultimate insult.

Then we have Republican Senators and office holders and CEOs allowing unsafe voting machines for their gain.

As thrilled as I am for the the successes of many caring and dedicated people (I add my thanks to all of you)...I fear we may be in for another round of blame cascading down, swirling, chrurling, spraying up and evaporating.

Can the American people care enough to get another system? Can voting citizens be convinced that hard copy paper and fair and staffed overseers has to be the result? Can the young become even more contemptuous and apathetic? Will we all accept the dictums of a right wing Sec of State and Supreme Court? What will the American people do with this?

The next battle?

I'm thrilled and apprehensive.

Somebody needs to tell Dr. Rubin about the GOOD stuff:

As an industry leader, Diebold has been the focus of much of the controversy over high-tech voting. Some people, in comments widely circulated on the Internet, contend that the company's software has been designed to allow voter fraud. Mr. Rubin called such assertions "ludicrous" and said the software's flaws showed the hallmarks of poor design, not subterfuge.

Or maybe that's the next step?

Eloriel

As a defense, I think this deserves a BwaaHaaaHaaaa!

in the software.

That doesn't make him an expert on the motivations of the people who created it, nor of those who may have exploited the "stunning, stunning" flaws.

First you prove that elections could have been jiggered.
Then you prove that they were.

Thanks to all of you who've worked so hard to see this come to fruition. I'm honored to be in such company. :toast:

:party:

This is a vital story and your patient research and investigation is starting to pay off.

:evilgrin: Now, who ordered the MOO SHOE PORK? :)

To everyone who busted their ass trying to bring this stuff to the light of day. Let's hope this is the beginning in trying to fix this stuff.

**I added excerpts just in case someone getting the letter thinks we are crackpots!

If you want.

I started another thread specifically to post a possible letter .....

Bev and DemA.....if you think it should be edited, please pipe in.....

Here is a quick letter I drafted that folks can use to get the word out to our governors and secretaries of state ASAP on the breaking stories about the Diebold DRE machines and software.

Use it, change it, make up your own......but we need these breaking stories in the hands of our officials ASAP. The federal HAVA deadlines are upon us and our states are buying these machines up right now...... We need to get on the stick!!

Dear _______:

Please read the following articles that have come out today, July 24, 2003. They concern some very serious questions about the reliability, accuracy, and fraud potential of the Diebold voting systems. As a resident of this state, I demand that our elected officials (from the Governor and the Secretary of State on down) make a serious inquiry into the systems that our state uses for upcoming elections. I urge expediency in this regard particularly in light of the HAVA deadlines that are upon all of us. These articles represent the very beginning of what will most certainly throw the voting delivery systems into a tailspin. Before we invest in machines that will undoubtedly be deemed the single greatest threat to our democracy, I urge you to get educated on the facts. And they aren’t pretty.

The links to the relevant reports are as follows:

http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf (re Johns Hopkins analysis and terrifying conclusions about Diebold systems)

Excerpt:

“We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html?pagewanted=print&position= (NYT Technology Section – article)

Excerpt:

The software that runs many high-tech voting machines contains serious flaws that would allow voters to cast extra votes and permit poll workers to alter ballots without being detected, computer security researchers said yesterday.

"We found some stunning, stunning flaws," said Aviel D. Rubin, technical director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University, who led a team that examined the software from Diebold Election Systems, which has about 33,000 voting machines operating in the United States.

The systems, in which voters are given computer-chip-bearing smart cards to operate the machines, could be tricked by anyone with $100 worth of computer equipment, said Adam Stubblefield, a co-author of the paper.

Snip

… ballots could be altered by anyone with access to a machine, so that a voter might think he is casting a ballot for one candidate while the vote is recorded for an opponent.

Snip

But Douglas W. Jones, an associate professor of computer science at the University of Iowa, said he was shocked to discover flaws cited in Mr. Rubin's paper that he had mentioned to the system's developers about five years ago as a state elections official.

"To find that such flaws have not been corrected in half a decade is awful," Professor Jones said.

Please see this link as well: http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/dieboldftp.html

Thank you.

You and DU are an excellent fit; thanks for all you do as well. :hi:

A million thanks to Bev, and DemActivist and Frieda and everyone else who contributed so much of their energies and time to bring this issue front and center. The right of 'One man, one vote' is an integral part of freedom itself, the very ideal which so many have died for and continue to die for as I type these words. You exemplify "Patriotism" Bev & all, and all of us in this country are indebted to each of you. I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Melinda

I watched as Anderson Consulting, yes tied the Enron one, went from company to company, lowballing, paying off and threatening managers, doing bait and switch and extortion first through my brother who made his living cleaning up AC messes when companies finally threw them out and finally when a good friend was involved in the State of Minnesota incident. He did everything he could to stop them from getting the contract and then took early retirement because he ended up being the only one not working for AC and was not about to take the fall when the following occured. Gov Carlson told them they were going to fix it and because I no longer knew anyone in that office I never knew how things came out. They took business from legitimate companies and I so wanted to see them go down.

(I always wondered what holes were there for hackers to come in and look around and mess things up. Perhaps we don't have a deficit, perhaps we have just been hacked.)

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?s_site=twincities&p_multi=PD|&p_product=PD&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_text_search-0="Anderson%20Consulting"&s_dispstring=Anderson%20Consulting%20AND%20date(07/17/1997%20to%2007/17/1989)&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=07/17/1997%20to%2007/17/1989&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no

Article 2 of 8; 712 words

NEW STATE COMPUTER SYSTEM: A COMMUNICATIONS NIGHTMARE

Source: BYLINE: Gary Dawson, Staff Writer
I've received several phone calls and letters implying I am a dunce for quoting state officials as saying the new $30 million statewide computer system handling everything from payroll to purchasing has some problems but is working rather swell.Horror stories arrive regularly.Ken Kincade, a Revenue Department collections agent, says the system ate $235 of his paycheck by applying federal and state tax, pension, Social Security and other deductions from cash he was owed for

Published on September 11, 1995, Page 3C, St. Paul Pioneer Press (MN)

EX-STATE COMMISSIONER PASSES UP JOB WITH CONSULTING FIRM AFTER CRITICISM

Source: BYLINE: GARY DAWSON, Staff Writer
Former state Employee Relations Commissioner Linda Barton, accused of a conflict of interest when she tentatively took a job with a company she helped the state negotiate a large contract with, has decided not to take the position.Gov. Arne Carlson first announced Barton's resignation from her position as commissioner on Sept. 22, saying she had decided to take a job with Anderson Consulting Co., the largest consulting company in the world. Barton had been part of a state team

Published on October 17, 1994, Page 3D, St. Paul Pioneer Press (MN)

Article 5 of 8; 481 words

SENATOR SEEKS CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST PROBE

Source: BYLINE: Julio Ojeda-Zapata, Staff Writer
A state senator wants to investigate the relationship between a prominent state official and a Minneapolis consulting firm, which he described as an apparent conflict of interest.The official, Linda Barton, raised eyebrows last month when she resigned to take a job with Anderson Consulting of Minneapolis. Barton, commissioner of the Employee Relations Department, sat on a steering committee responsible for approving and managing a contract with the firm.``This does not pass any kind

Published on October 5, 1994, Page 4D, St. Paul Pioneer Press (MN) :tinfoilhat:

What if the states are not bankrupt? (links)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=72158&mesg_id=72158&page=

Offshore Company Captures Online Military Vote

http://www.ecotalk.org/SERVEaccenture.htm

by Lynn Landes 7/16/03

"Last year, while President Bush marshaled U.S. forces for the invasion of Iraq, the patriots at the Department of Defense awarded the contract for a new online voting system for the military... to an offshore company.

It gets worse.

Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment (SERVE) is the system and Accenture (formerly Anderson Consulting of Enron bankruptcy fame) is the company. And although Accenture has not been officially implicated in the Enron scandal, they have created a reputation of their own that is already raising eyebrows.

This is hot off the newswire -- 7/15/03 "NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- Accenture Ltd., the former Andersen Consulting, disclosed Tuesday that it might have violated the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Chairman and CEO Joe Forehand, on an earnings call with analysts and reporters Tuesday, said the consulting firm's Middle East operations could be in non-compliance with the Act, which prohibits the bribery of foreign government officials by U.S. persons."

The Canada-based Polaris Institute published a scathing report on Accenture, saying, "Accenture's efforts in government outsourcing have often been very expensive and/or of poor quality. There is good reason to question Accenture's track record in outsourcing of government services."

Accenture is the leading offshore beneficiary of government contracts whose main business is the privatization of government services, according to Lee Drutman of Citizen Works, a non-profit founded by Ralph Nader. Accenture has a troubling track record, a close business relationship with Dick Cheney's Halliburton, and 2500 partners - more than half are not U.S. citizens...."

I am so glad this is getting out. :toast: :thumbsup:

Our state Board of Elections here in Kentucky. I will send some info to my rep, the Att General, and my cousin* who is a state rep and good Democrat. No, she's a great Democrat.

*You Kentucky people may know her as one of the "Gang of Six."

If I got the contact info for Max Cleland to you, would you like to call him and ask for his reaction to this?????

I'd love to deliver this message to him. Perhaps we can alleviate some of his bitterness over his 2002 election, huh? Knowing he didn't "lose" might make him feel better.

Bev

and bcc'd a copy to you.

:toast:

I am glad you are getting this out there. I applaude you for taking the time to pursue this.

Well it is nice that the guys in the ivory tower get together to back up what was said in the law suit--from another vendor!

This shows, as I suspected, systemic problems with certification. The development of those systemic problems is a story in itself. I am glad I did not shut up! I am glad Bev and I got together!

I am launching a web site in support of the suit I brought, and will be announcing the site soon, which will have some new information and analysis on it, not seen before!

In the mean time, if anyone wants to donate to the suit, please do so The check is made out to "Citizens for Corporate Accountability-WA", which is a real-live non-profit.

Do NOT make checks out in my name.

Mail to:
Citizens for Corporate Accountability
Attn: Dan Spillane
410 E Denny Way #229
Seattle, WA 98122

2/25/2003 -- Dan Spillane, a voting machine test engineer, has filed a lawsuit against his former employer, DRE touch-screen voting machine manufacturer VoteHere.

Spillane's lawsuit charges wrongful and retaliatory termination; he contends he was removed so that he could not blow the whistle to certification labs and pass critical information to the US General Accounting Office.

He says he has evidence which shows voting systems are certified despite known flaws, demonstrating a weakness in both the NASED and the ITA system for certifying machines.

-- SANTA CLARA COUNTY decided Tuesday night to purchase machines without a paper trail, despite the urgent warnings of over 100 of the nation's top computer security experts. Officials pointed to the strength of NASED and ITA certification when explaining their reasons for ignoring the warnings.

-- Similarly, Collins County Texas decided this week not to follow safety recommendations for a paper ballot audit trail, in part due to assurances that the NASED and ITA certifications could be counted upon to catch errors or vote- rigging.

Spillane, the first insider from a voting machine manufacturer to come forward, reports that system flaws sometimes go undetected. His former company, VoteHere, manufactures touch-screen machines of its own -- which have been certified by NASED and national ITAs -- but also markets its software for use inside machines made by other companies.

Spillane says in his lawsuit that he reported over 250 issues in the VoteHere voting system, including critical errors that can prevent the machines from correctly registering the votes, or working efficiently on election day. He sought meetings with company officials to express concerns about integrity flaws, which he says led to his firing. His complaint indicates that VoteHere did not address the flaws, and that the VoteHere system was certified by independent testing labs despite known issues.

Georgia recently approved VoteHere's machines, and the military and others are considering the technology.

Spillane also alleges company officials bragged about using political connections to pass software, rather than meeting the rules.

VoteHere's board of directors includes former CIA director Robert Gates. VoteHere's Chairman is Admiral Bill Owens, who was senior military assistant to Secretaries of Defense Frank Carlucci and Dick Cheney, and also includes Ralph Munro, a key Washington State politician.

Spillane's findings also suggest the recently-passed Help America Vote Act makes problems worse, by releasing a large sum of up-front money for equipment based on the same approval system which led to Florida 2000.

Permission is granted for reprint.

The lawsuit is at:
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=9

It's not JUST DIEBOLD.

Its starting to come together! :bounce:

...I was afraid they'd nibble and put it down.

Thanks for all your hard work and effort- and the big chunk this has taken out of your life.

Now, why do they not buy Avante and Accupoll? Because salespeople for other systems say things, like they did today, that imply Avante, for example, is not nationally certified. I was at a county demonstration for another vendor today. I wish I had written a quick statement for her to sign and get noterized, because the person who could do that was there!

And we know that some Secretaries of State have worked pretty hard to keep voter-verified systems OUT of their states.

The Cox thing is beautiful. I had a lengthy discourse with Common Cause over the issue and one of the rationales given was Georgia and what a great job Cox had done!

By the way, there are a lot of unhappy people in the League of Women Voters. Seems that decision came from the top down to diss voter-verified ballots. That's not the way the League is supposed to work. Maybe this will drive the point home, that perhaps the League needs to act a lot faster on this one?

We don't need the states to look into the issue- we need them to stop purchasing voting machines immediately, unless they can produce a legitimate, TANGIBLE, audit trail.

More digging to do yet. There seem to be some vested interests out there and they're not giving up easily. Neither are we!!!!
:D

Congrats to all those who have been working on this task!

:toast:

It's finally unravelling.

...

We can only hope. Great work Bev!

...or the third of it. Because this paper, which uncovered so many flaws, only looked at those portions of the front-end system which were not uploaded using the minimal PKZip encryption.

The back-end part of the system (the notorious GEMS vote-tallying software, written in another insecure language, Microsoft Access, in an insecure operating system, Microsoft Windows, using extra, potentially tamper-enabling summary tables and suspiciously-named, potentially backdoor-enabling unauditable components such as 'DateTimeStamp Adjuster) was not examined in this paper. Nor were those other parts of the system which were semi-protected by PKZip. So there's potentially a whole lot more worms in the can these computer scientists opened up.

We did not have source code to Diebold’s GEMS back-end election management system.

Furthermore, we only analyzed source code that could be directly observed and copied from the CVS software archive without further effort. A large amount of the other data made publicly available was protected by very weak compression/encryption software known as PKZip, which requires a password for access to the underlying work. PKZip passwords are relatively easy to avoid, and programs for locating passwords for PKZip files are readily available online. Moreover, passwords that others have located for these files have been freely available online for some time. Nonetheless, we decided to limit our research to only the files that were publicly available without any further effort, in part due to concerns about possible liability under the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Even with this restricted view of the source code, we discovered significant and wide-reaching security vulnerabilities in the AccuVote-TS voting terminal.

If Diebold were subpoenaed, say, for a copy of the code - I am guessing that even now, months after the code was found at the FTP site, Diebold would be unable to hide the flaws before responding. Even if some of the issues were resolved, they could not hide all of them. Correct?

To let Diebold come out in defense of their programs and then hit them with proof of their lies.

It's a typical attorney trick - never ask the witness a question you don't know the answer to beforehand.

He's gonna love this.

Kudos to all, and raspberries to one particular naysayer.

I'll put him on, if someone has it.

Bev

mike@michaelmoore.com

The company said its e-voting software is constantly updated to comply with certification requirements, but the researchers said the software would have to be rebuilt from scratch in order to address the security vulnerabilities they found.
       “The stuff that we looked at is not something from which you could evolve a secure system,” Avi Rubin, technical director of Johns Hopkins’ Information Security Institute, told MSNBC.com.
</snip>

http://www.msnbc.com/news/943558.asp?vts=072420031755

Security in the Georgia Voting System
Britain J. Williams, Ph.D.
April 23, 2003

National laboratories selected by and monitored by the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) Voting System Board administer the Qualification tests. During these tests the system is evaluated for accuracy, reliability, availability, and maintainability. In addition, the system is subjected to various environmental conditions that simulate the conditions under which an election system may be transported and stored. A major component of these tests is a line-by-line examination of the source code for the system. This review includes an evaluation of the function of each module of the code to insure that no extraneous code is contained in the system (emphasis added). A complete description of the Qualification tests can be found in the FEC Voting System Standards section on the FEC web site: http://www.fec.gov.

---

How does an EXPERT in security miss the obvious flaws discovered by these scientists? Let us not forget, Dr. Williams' retired as the head of the Computer Science Department of Kennesaw State University to do this job. His credentials are supposed to be equivalent to the folks who have completed these reviews......

The certification lab is doing them. Williams, for the most part, simply reviews certification tests, approves them, and approves their certification checklists when the state buys the system.

He's not actually doing the line-by-line examination of the code himself. That he leaves up to the certifier, supposedly, and this brings us back to Mr. Shawn Southworth.

Cheers.

This is from the interview I did with Dr. David Dill on 7-12-03 for KPFT Radio:

Question: So, using one company, Diebold. Something like 800,000 lines of software code are in their proprietary software. Is it realistic to expect a certification board to go through and find any problems, if there were one?

David Dill: It is practically impossible for someone to review software of any length at all -- even 10,000 or maybe even 1500 -- lines of code to make sure that's 100% error-free. The certification is done by organizations called independent testing authorities. They couldn't do it, no matter how hard they tried. Now, from what I have learned, they don't try hard enough. There are claims that the code is inspected line by line. I know that that is not sufficient to find bugs and certainly not to find tampering that is deliberately hidden in that software. In fact, the tampering may not even be in the software that's presented to the independent testing authority.

So far as I can determine, the review conducted by independent testing authorities may not actually include a human being who inspects the code line by line. What I've heard from certain vendors and people who've talked to some of these independent testing authorities, is that they actually just use other computer programs to inspect the code -- submitted to them by the vendors-- and those computer programs are very much like style checkers in Microsoft Word or something. They'll check the spelling of individual things, make sure that your English usage is okay. But they won't make sure that your document is saying the right thing, because only you know that. So, I think that the current inspection process is completely inadequate for ensuring reliability and certainly computer security. I think that the problem is basically unsolvable without an independent audit trail.

:thumbsup:

been a front page story though. I wish they'd pick up on ES&S too and their VERY scary ties to certain Senators and the "christian" reconstructionists (taliban).

AJC did the best they could to make this sound not too bad. Ohhh, but it's gonna get worse.

Today's going to be a very rough day for some people, the first of many.

Bev

This is something HUGE! DU ROCKS!!
Scott

What do you see as the "chain of events"?

Papers "pick up"...then TV Press....then investigations? Am I being naive to think this way?

What do you see happening?

Here is a lot of info, cut and paste as needed, get it quick, it's a blog and gets updated frequently.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org

Thanks,

Bev

How do we get the cash-strapped states who have already bought these Diebold machines to get the "A" machines that have open source code and a paper trail?

I would hope they could sue Diebold and have the money returned to the states, but how long would that take?

We must not use these machines in the 2004 election. We may have to return to the hand counted paper ballot to ensure our votes are counted.

And there is always the absentee ballot, if push comes to shove--altho one must have faith your absentee ballot will be recorded, if they are run through these same machines!

No wonder you cracked open the good Merlot! I'm putting out my flag today as a symbol of hope.

:loveya: ((((((HUG)))))))

Kind of a cross between All The President's Men and Erin Brockovitch, with a supporting cast of 28,000 DUers.

Congratulations!

congratulations Bev and all on your work. One person
can definitely make a difference, especially surrounded
by encouragement.

Immediately.

NOW.

Until all machine codes have been independently evaluated, and we have voter-verified paper trails, and remote access has been removed, and we have robust auditing in place --

Voting on these things has got to stop NOW.

Then someone can talk about a movie. Then we'll know at least there will be the freedom to MAKE movies as we see fit.

Bev

I've never seen a picture of Bev but this is how I imagine she looks: petite, age 40ish, feisty (of course, we all know that!), big brown honest eyes, hand gestures for emphasis. Which star fits this profile, and BEV, how close am I? Yaaaaaaaay, Bev and the DU supersleuths!

50s, very round at the moment, graying hair (was blonde until I met this story), short, feisty and hand gestures, loud. Can't imagine what my husband sees in me, but he is as steady and fun as ever, considering this weird person I've become. When this calms down I'm very much looking forward to getting to know him again and taking care of a few million details I've let slide.

Bev

we see the same things, and that is that WE LOVE YOU, BEV!

For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal.

Really, Bev. You must take this all from the freeper perspective. Being able to cast an unlimited number of votes is their idea of democracy.

;)


Seriously, excellent job there.

Hopefully they will do a heads up at least following the NYT lead. This is the kind of break we need to get the issue out there. This is a major documentation that is pretty solid in the purchasing debates AND possible lawsuits against Diebold for false claims. The first goal admittedly is to stop and then recall this junk. The second is to snowball the digging into how and why this has happened, the smoking guns on vote fraud conspiracy.

It would be so easy to jump ahead and lump it all together, and given the consequences I would if it were the ONLY way, but I think patience is paying off. Another issue of throwing existent electronic voting systems into disarray and allowing OTHER forms of fraud and disenfranchisement must be kept in mind too. The SERVE program by the Feds and the Pentagon is an expansion of the internet voting proposals. That too is bulling ahead despite security issues from 59 votes to 100,000 in 2004).

Looking at the big picture I see it as a vital part of the neocon blitz, going for all the marbles everywhere and any defeat could unwravel everything. It all seems to fit with the maniacal speed and fanaticism employed against their "foes". Didn't George Bush in Florida and Texas say he trusted machines over the people? It sounded then exactly as it sounds now.

In taking those machine cards home with here. Are there any implications there?

There should be songs sung about you, poems written and banners waved. You, DEMActivist and so many DUers and others may very well be responsible for the preservation of democracy in this country, and around the world.

The Founders are looking down upon you today with pride in what you are accomplishing.

hedda

From page 2:

"Subsequent to this, the ballot is "cast" and the voter is free to leave."

Did I just miss it, or have there been instances when voters have not been free to leave?

From page 3:

"the company finalized an agreement for up to $55.6 million to deliver touch-screen voting technology to the state of Maryland"

Now that's a real shame (specifically, a real waste of money) considering that Maryland is closing at the end of August:

http://www.theonion.com/onion3928/deficit_wracked_maryland.html

;)

Last year, 2002, Georgia paid Diebold $54 million for 22,000 machines.

THIS year, 2003, Maryland has just contracted to pay Diebold $55 million for 11,000 machines.

You do the math. ;-)

Eloriel

But the bigger issue is, with the Maryland budget crisis and all,

JUST WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

Could it have anything to do with the newly-elected republican governor? :freak:


Also, from the picture on page 6 of the Hopkins pdf, the 'voting machine' looks like a laptop in a suitcase - and they cost $5,000 each?? The hardware itself must run in the $700 - 1,400 range (I assume it's on the low end of computing power, and touch screens aren't that expensive anymore). Looks like Diebold has found themselves a profitable niche market.

As I told someone recently: this isn't just a national issue, it's an international issue.

Eloriel

... because they accurately count votes for _each_ party.

*smile*

....with the gold plated memory cards! :evilgrin:

what a thrill watching this come together from the DU board and phone calls to this.......

the TIP of the BBV iceberg of exposure

bravos, kudos and deep appreciation to Bev, DEM and the entire DU/BBV research team!

Hi,

I posted a new thread with Bev's latest revelations...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=72695&mesg_id=72695&page=2

It seems to have been swept onto page 2 in this forum in no time flat.

Bevs latest is here...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00198.htm

We have lots of links here...
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/

And we will be watching this like a hawk.

The NYT really did bend over backwards for Diebold... and they even managed to get the authors of the report to say that the idea of real election tampering was ludicrous.

Funny really given that the Hopkins scientists only looked at a tiny fraction of what was there.. and not at all at GEMS which is the key point of action for any would be election stealer.

But Hey! This is a very good start...

Big Ups to Bev and all you DUers... you are an inspiring bunch.

Regards
Alastair Thompson
Scoop

We are all happy you are here! :)

What a wonderful feeling to have the internet to reach out and bring us all together to accomplish what would have been a near impossible!

I :loveya: the internet!

Don't mean to out anybody, but allthecat played a crucial role in this. Absolutely crucial, as in, if the behind the scenes story ever gets told, a must-include.

Thanks again,

Bev

Sent this today:
-----------------

Dear League of Women Voters Director:

Last week, I contacted you to encourage you to lobby the National League to encourage their support of House Resolution 2239; a bill that would mandate an auditable paper trail for electronic voting machines and ban the practice of keeping the software that runs those machines a secret.

My concern was prompted by revelations by independent researchers that the Diebold system software has security flaws. At that time, I wrote to you that the mainstream media had not picked up on the news yet, and I imagine that may have left some question about credibility in your minds.

Today the New York Times reports on the issue. Here are some excerpts from their story:

"The software that runs many high-tech voting machines contains serious flaws that would allow voters to cast extra votes and permit poll workers to alter ballots without being detected, computer security researchers said yesterday."

"'We found some stunning, stunning flaws,' said Aviel D. Rubin, technical director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University, who led a team that examined the software from Diebold Election Systems, which has about 33,000 voting machines operating in the United States."

"The list of flaws in the Diebold software is long, according to the paper, which is online at www.avirubin.com/vote.pdf . Among other things, the researchers said, ballots could be altered by anyone with access to a machine, so that a voter might think he is casting a ballot for one candidate while the vote is recorded for an opponent."

"Peter G. Neumann, an expert in computer security at SRI International, said the Diebold code was "just the tip of the iceberg" of problems with electronic voting systems."

I encourage you to read the full New York Time Article at http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html and the John Hopkins report at: www.avirubin.com/vote.pdf

This issue is too important to be ignored. In light of this information, it is vital that the National League change their position against paper audit trails. Please take appropriate action and express your support of House Resolution 2239.

Cordially,

xxxx xxxxxxxx

As many people know, Bev has asked activists to contact the League of Women Voters because they have inexplicably come out AGAINST paper trails. So has Common Cause. having these two highly influential organizations against paper trails gives these nefarious voting machine companies a lot of cover and thwarts our efforts -- and Congress's efforts -- to fix the problem.

For more information, see her activist site: http://www.blackboxvoting.org

Excellent letter! Let's put the pressure on. Another tactic, and there is scads of contact info on Bev's site, is to bring this to the attention of your LOCAL League. Someone mentioned upthread that their position was imposed from top down. This is (from my limited experience with the League) absolutely unheard of. If anything, judging from my past involvement with them, people who worked within or with the League would often get extremely frustrated precisely because their bottom-up method of coming to positions on matters was so time-consuming cumbersome. But that's the way they always did things. Why the change NOW? on THIS?

Eloriel

in the wee hours of this morning. I have not yet rec'd a response from the initial letters sent.

Anyone else? I subscribe at home - it's not in the Circuits section. Anyone find it???

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/technology/24VOTE.html

recent decision to spend $55 million on 11,000 Diebold voting machines.

"Who can I talk to about this? Who can I interview???"

Reporters in Baltimore saw the NYT article AND the new Scoop article and now they are on the hunt for someone -- anyone -- who will answer their questions.

Bev

Baltimore paper? I can't remember the name of the paper but it was a long time ago. How can the Baltimore media be pissed when one of their own spotlighted this very issue months ago?

On edit: If you have any conversations with Maryland media, it might be a good idea to point them to that article...it would be a very deserved boost to an independent media source that was WAY ahead of the curve on this issue.

Absolutely. He was one of the first ones into the fray.

Thanks for reminding me.

Bev

for anyone who's interested

http://www.citypaper.com/2003-02-19/mobs2.html

my folder is getting tons of links all of a sudden. :kick:

and after slogging through a lot of national stories, I turned the page to see this BBV story! It made my morning.

Keep up the good work, Bev!

:bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast:

They said it would be worse than the punch card system. I think this study was released around 2001. It was before Palm Beach County purchased their touch screens (but what the heck they had Jeb Bush and Harris pushing for the purchasing of the touch screen systems).

Okay, I'm having a good day...

I'm sure you're much younger though! :) HAPPY RETURNS! and CONGRATS ON A GREAT JOB!!!!

And wasn't gray until I met this story. Really, it did that.

Bev

:party: :bounce: :party: :bounce::party: :bounce: :party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce:

:party: :bounce: :party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce:

:party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce::party: :bounce:

Thanks Bev, I've been so busy as of late I almost forgot my wife's BD tomorrow! :evilfrown:

We will be splitting a bottle of 'a nice Merlot' and toasting you, and everyone involved in the most important grass roots effort this century! (well so far!) Happy Birthday! What a wonderful birthday present! :toast: :)

Happy birthday.... you think you are in the loop :)

and tomorrow: LA Times, and coming up, Wall Street Journal, Newsday, New York Post, Newsweek...Iowa looking to decertify the machines, and #1 news story on Yahoo.

How do you feel?

Thanks so much!

Bev

Happy Birthday, DEAR BEV...EV, Happy Birthday to you, and many more!!!!


:party: :toast: :bounce:

"I'm sure we will be doing A LOT of stories," she said.

I provided her with contacts for:

- DOUGLAS W. JONES, Associate Professor, The University of Iowa, Iowa Board of Examiners for Voting Machines and Electronic Voting Systems and expert congressional witness on electronic voting machines

- DR. DAVID DILL, Electronic Voting Expert, Stanford University Dept. of Computer Science

- KIM ALEXANDER: California Voter Foundation

- DAN SPILLANE - Whistleblower, a former senior test engineer who has built touch screen machines. Spillane has expertise in certification standards and legal issues

- REP. RUSH HOLT: Architect of a HB 2239, a bill to require voter-verified paper trails, eliminate risky remote access to voting machines, and require proper auditing of results

- ALISTAIR THOMPSON Publisher/Editor Scoop Media, the publication which released the 40,000 Diebold files, a bold decision which is already being compared to the release of the Pentagon Papers:

- JOE RICHARDSON: Diebold official spokesman

- ROBERT JOHN UROSEVICH ("BOB") - Diebold Election Systems CEO

- TALBOT IREDALE: Diebold head programmer and a stockholder

- SHAWN SOUTHWORTH: Official voting machine certifier for the United States

- DR. BRIT WILLIAMS: Official voting machine examiner and member of NASED board that selects voting machine certifiers

- R. DOUG LEWIS: Head of "The Election Center" which organizes NASED and NASS

- KAY MAXWELL, president, League of Women Voters: Opposes HB 2239 provisions for voter-verified paper trail. (local chapters are not in agreement with national office on this)

- MICROSOFT

Now that he is part of the tech industry.

She's afraid Gray Davis will get screwed "because there's not enough time to get the new voting machines in there."

And CNN is in apology mode already.

Doesn't matter. More to come, and it's gonna be unspinnable. (All PR is good PR; apologizing for Diebold is a helluva lot better than not talking about it, or saying "it's fun to vote on them!")

Bev

Karl Rove, :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:! She is constantly on CNN with Bay(by) Buchanan and when I see them I want to: (you know what, but where can I find the puke Smilie? It isn't in the Smilie lookup table)

Judy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=106&topic_id=745&mesg_id=745&page=

And please......add to the links...(and PM me with good voting machine people links......so I don't have to sift) :-)

Or is it Bev Franklin? Or is it Bev Paine?

Whoever you are, you have the thanks of a grateful nation groaning under the lash of Tiberius*.

:toast: :toast:

Would you trust your vote to the Internet?

Yes.
Not today, but maybe soon.
Never.
None of the above.
Vote to see results

A lazy reader might think that E-voting means voting in these little polls on the internet. Whatever.

Anyway, don't forget to rate the story, everyone.

NYT article, he downloaded and printed the article while I was on the phone with him.

Has also picked up the latest -

"Several well-known security researchers have examined the code for Diebold's voting machines (which we last mentioned two weeks ago) and produced an extensive report (pdf). The NYT has a story on the report, which cuts to the bone: 'Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal."

Oh boy - this is getting HUGE!! :bounce:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/24/153258&mode=thread&tid=103&tid=126&tid=128&tid=99">Slashdot discussion

And the first comment from the discussion (haha!!):

"voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal."

Were they testing these in Florida a few years ago?

O8) You are Democracy's Guardian Angel!!! O8)

And DemActivist, and Spillane, and ALL the incredible DUers who spent many hours bringing in the technical debates that helped make this seed begin to sprout!!!

(((((((((((( :loveya:BIG HUGS ALL AROUND!!!:loveya: ))))))))))))

Many thanks from the bottom of my heart, and congratulations for putting the first big crack in the ice.

"Gratitude" can't begin to describe what I feel.


:hi::toast::beer::party::silly:


:kick:


Sue

And thanks to everyone who worked on those threads!! As a total computer illiterate I'm afraid I couldn't comprehend most of what was unfolding - let alone contribute! But how I DO appreciate your work to rescue/reinstate Democracy in the U.S.!!

evening crowd.

There's gonna be a BIG party on DU tonite!!!

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:


:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:

I was skeptical at first, and all the Black Box voting threads were confusing to me, but now I see you were ahead of the curve.

as big as the pentagon papers, wasn't that the disputed claim?

"Even with this restricted view of the source code, we discovered significant and wide-reaching security vulnerabilities in the AccuVote-TS voting terminal. Most notably, voters can easily program their own smartcards to simulate the behavior of valid smartcards used in the election. With such homebrew cards, a voter can cast multiple ballots without leaving any trace. A voter can also perform actions that normally require administrative privileges, including viewing partial results and terminating the election early. Similar undesirable modifications could be made by malevolent poll workers (or even maintenance staff) with access to the voting terminals before the start of an election. Furthermore, the protocols used when the voting terminals communicate with their home base, both to fetch election configuration information and to report final election results, do not use cryptographic techniques to authenticate the remote end of the connection nor do they check the integrity of the data in transit. Given that these voting terminals could communicate over insecure phone lines or even wireless Internet connections, even unsophisticated attackers can perform untraceable “man-in-the-middle” attacks."

every decision bush makes is tainted by his original fraud. it is no less true of, say, saxby chambliss. now it will be demonstrated. how many owe their offices to fraud? what shall we do with them? and you thought 2000 posed a constitutional crisis?

how will they possibly survive the outing of this truth?

WASHINGTON, July 24 (Reuters) - Software flaws in a high-tech voting system could allow vandals to tamper with election results in several U.S. states, computer security researchers said on Thursday.

Interest in electronic voting systems has grown since the 2000 presidential election, when problems with primitive punch-card systems in Florida led to a bruising, weeks-long recount battle ultimately settled by the Supreme Court.


http://www.forbes.com/home_asia/newswire/2003/07/24/rtr1037484.html

No sign of that ludicrous quote.. only the old grey lady :)

:bounce: LOVE IT! LOVE IT! LOVE IT!! :bounce:

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:

:kick::kick::kick:

and they are concerned and angry.

I haven't heard back from the state agencies I wrote, but I didn't really believe I would get one so soon.

:toast: :bounce:

Happy Birthday, Bev!!! I have my flag up too. I have some hope, again.

Is there a link for those counties? Don't ever let the nay sayers get to you. To justify cheating at any level is O.K.

To everyone who kept all the 2000 election info, copy it. Not just the link, not just to your hard-drive. Soon enough it will just seem to disappear.

:kick:


:kick:


:kick:

There seems to be a headlong rush to prepare for the elections in California before the recall that’s going to occur in a few months. What’s going to happen with this I wonder, as I don’t hear Grey Davis, Cruz Bustamante or Kevin Shelley discussing this matter. If indeed there are a large number of these machines in place in time for the recall, it could constitute an overwhelming temptation for someone to tamper with the results, especially now that the means and method are so widely publicized. Surely, if tampering hasn’t already been tried, it will be tried in this case as the stakes are so great, the knowledge so widespread and the chance of using these systems again diminishes after this story leads to possible legislative or similar action.

Some links regarding the chaotic run up to the election:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/7085725p-8033607c.html

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/6364322.htm

if they see they can't win by cheating.

Congrats to everyone who worked so hard. It still hasn't registered in my poor little brain yet but I think it's starting to hit because I've practically stopped breathing.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=usa&q=diebold&btnG=Search+News


only a few entries now, but just wait.