Did E-Vote Firm Patch Election?

Wired News ^ | Oct. 13, 2003 | Kim Zetter

[Voteamerica]

Diebold Election Systems has had a tumultuous year, and it doesn't look like it's getting any better.

Last January the electronic voting machine maker faced public embarrassment when voting activists revealed the company's insecure FTP server was making its software source code available for everyone to see.

[Voteamerica]

IMO we should care about this. There is no point in waiting until the RATS figure out a way to work this to their advantage.

[boris]

He who controls the count, controls the vote.

[Voteamerica]

"He who controls the count, controls the vote. "

So for the time being we are fine. But I guarantee we will rue the day that we thought that we were the only players in this game. They can and will figure out a way to manipulate this to their advantage. At that point we will wish there were a way to check for fraud and recount the votes.

[Diamond]

Last January the electronic voting machine maker faced public embarrassment when voting activists revealed the company's insecure FTP server was making its software source code available for everyone to see.

What's wrong with that? Wouldn't a secret code be more useful for generating fraud than an open code?

Cordially,

[Voteamerica]

"Last January the electronic voting machine maker faced public embarrassment when voting activists revealed the company's insecure FTP server was making its software source code available for everyone to see.
What's wrong with that? Wouldn't a secret code be more useful for generating fraud than an open code?"

Of coarse, but the point is control. The less the voters understand the higher the potential for fraud. Why anyone on either side would think that the theft of elections is fine is beyond me, but it really does look like we are going to let the RATS steal a few before we pay attention.

[zeugma]

The only reason the Ga. systems are getting any scrutiny is because the incumbant Demo Gov. didn't get re-elected. Personally, I'll take any press we can get on this issue of ballot systems with out paper audit trails. Non-verifiable elections are a great evil that is creeping up on us even as we speak.

The code for the systems should be open as well. There should be ways for the systems to be independantly audited by anyone who wants to audit the code. It's the only way to guarantee that nothing bad is going on byhind our backs.

I also noted with some amusement that they are actually trusting election results to computers that run 'windows ce'! I wouldn't trust a CE device to compute my bank statements.

[Voteamerica]

"The only reason the Ga. systems are getting any scrutiny is because the incumbant Demo Gov. didn't get re-elected. Personally, I'll take any press we can get on this issue of ballot systems with out paper audit trails. Non-verifiable elections are a great evil that is creeping up on us even as we speak.
The code for the systems should be open as well. There should be ways for the systems to be independantly audited by anyone who wants to audit the code. It's the only way to guarantee that nothing bad is going on byhind our backs.

I also noted with some amusement that they are actually trusting election results to computers that run 'windows ce'! I wouldn't trust a CE device to compute my bank statements"

Why isn't there general interest in this story? It is strange to me that the media hasn't run with it, could it be that they are fine with elections that can be easily fixed? Maybe there was no fraud in Georgia, that is what I think anyway, but there is no way to know. When the RATS have a surprise victory then folks over here will care, but we won't be able to check that either.

[upchuck]

We need a law, unfortunately: Any voting shall have a verifiable paper audit trail.

[Libertina]

there's no paper trail to verify the votes
If you thought hanging chads was a messy issue; welcome to the Daddy Can 'o Worms.

[TC Rider]

They can and will figure out a way to manipulate this to their advantage.

Easier than you think. When I voted 'early' in the 2000 race, we went to a central location with touchscreen laptops. The touchscreens were totally out of adjustment. Touching the big button for Bush registered on the Gore side, imagine that. Only by guessing and rubbing the far side of the screen was I able to register a vote for Bush.

The clerk sitting there was uninterested and unwilling to fix it.

I like the optical ballots we use here in Wake County. They are validated for overvotes, marring, etc when run through the scanner when you vote and then leave a very clear paper trail. A bad ballot, overvotes, etc will not be accepted.

[Voteamerica]

Optical scan is the best of all worlds, cheaper clearer and there can be a hand recount. There is a reason that they have made this more complicated then it needs to be, you just watch.