Posted on 12/15/2005 8:18:39 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
Elections supervisor: Some Diebold voting machines can be hacked TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- Some Diebold-made voting machines, which are used in Florida and elsewhere throughout the country, can be hacked to change the results of an election, according to tests conducted for Leon County's elections supervisor and a monitoring group. Ion Sancho said tests by two computer experts showed an insider could secretly change election results and the number of ballots cast on Diebold's optical-scan machines. The tests caused Sancho this week to scrap Leon's Diebold machines for a system made by Election Systems and Software, according to a story published Thursday by The Miami Herald. Diebold, which has been criticized for its connections to President Bush, has disputed the test results. Optical-scan machines use paper ballots where voters fill in bubbles to mark their candidates. The ballots are then fed into scanners that record the selections. Some prefer the optical-scan system over touch-screen computer systems because the paper ballots can be counted by hand if there is a discrepancy.
But Herbert Thompson, who conducted one of the tests for Sancho and the nonprofit election-monitoring group BlackBoxVoting.org, said he was "shocked" at how easy it was to get into the optical-scan system, make the loser the winner and leave without a trace. The machine that tabulates the overall count asked for a user name and password, but didn't require it, he said.
That meant it had not just a "front door, but a back door as big as a garage," said Thompson, an adjunct computer-science professor at Florida Institute of Technology and a strategist at Security Innovation, which tests software for companies such as Google and Microsoft.
In the other test, Finnish computer expert Harri Hursti tried to manipulate election results with the memory card inserted into each Diebold voting machine. The card records votes during an election, then is taken to a central location where results are totaled.
Hursti figured out how to hack into the memory card by using an agricultural scanning device easily available on the Internet, said BlackBox founder Bev Harris. He learned how to hide votes, make losers out of winners and leave no trace, she said.
Diebold spokesman David Bear did not immediately return a phone call from The Associated Press seeking comment Thursday.
But after BlackBox and Sancho announced the results, the Ohio-based company's senior lawyer, Michael Lindroos, sent a letter to Sancho, the county and the state that questioned the results and called the test "a very foolish and irresponsible act" that may have violated licensing agreements.
Sancho also criticized the Florida Secretary of State's Office, which approves voting machines for use in the state, for not catching the alleged problems with Diebold's system.
A spokeswoman for the secretary of state's office said any faults Sancho found were between him and Diebold.
"If Ion Sancho has security concerns with his system, he needs to discuss them with Diebold," spokeswoman Jenny Nash said.
In 2003, Diebold's then-CEO Walden W. O'Dell gained national attention when he invited people to a fundraiser for President Bush with a letter stating he planned to help "Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." Ohio turned out to be the state that clinched Bush's re-election in 2004.
Critics said the maker of voting machines should not be involved in partisan politics. The company since has prohibited its top executives from making political contributions.
Diebold supplies optical-scan voting systems to 29 Florida counties and touch-screen machines to one.
Many Florida counties switched to computer-based elections systems from punchcard ballots after the problem-plagued 2000 presidential election. Those cardboard ballots, where voters punch holes marking their choices, were plagued by incomplete and multiple punches. President Bush won the state by 537 votes after a five-week recount over Democrat Al Gore, clinching the White House.
Bush won.
GOOD -- Easier for us to cheat next time. Take that DU.
Oh my God, the Attack of the Dangling Chads...this ought to get the ballot-box-stuffing libs going again...
Well, they can be hacked. The reality is that having election machines with no paper trail is stupid.
I don't know what is wrong with the optical scanners used here in Oklahoma. The things are scanned for an easy and quick reading, but the actual ballots remain in case it is close and there is a challenge.
But that would make too much sense - much better to just say there is a problem and exploit the information to set the stage to steal elections when the Dims lose the election.
I don't know; after watching what's going on in Iraq, I am all for the Purple Finger.
Given that the old paper balloting system could be "hacked" too, via the mass manufacture of fake paper ballots (ref: Democrat operative caught in Florida with a voting machine in his trunk), what's the difference?
If it is possible to commit vote fraud, it will happen every time...........
and be committed by both both parties.
Perhaps this report is the reason behind the big cheese at diebold's sudden resignation?
Now there's an idea I'd back wholeheartedly!
Am I alone in my desire to keep paper voting? Electronic counting is fine, but what is so hard about coloring in a bubble?
"News" always comes around in full circle, literally. Bush won then and he still won today.
The problem with paper is that the Dems can manufacture the necessary ballots weeks after the fact. There a countless examples of more ballots than registered voters in Dem precincts.
Are these systems networked with internet access? I don't see how a closed system could be hacked.
ALL machines can be hacked. There is no fool-proof system. We certainly know that paper ballots can be *hacked*.
One way to vastly improve voting security with computerized machines would be to have the machine print out a paper summary of the vote which would also be stored. The voter would get to see the paper ballot marked with his choices and put it into the ballot box. That way if there is a discrepancy, the votes can be verified by human beings. This would be a very simple and inexpensive safeguard. Why this is/was not a requirement of all automated voting machines is beyond comprehension.
Somehow, the machines perform perfectly when Democrats win. Look at the CA election last month. All of Arnold's propositions were defeated and nary a word about intimidation, fraud or disenfranchisement.
Yikes! The purple finger looms
over American voters!
My bullhorn heckled Irv for days in front of that Emergency Operations Building in West Palm Beach during the recount.
He ended up giving me the Democrat Party salute with one finger!
Given their history since at least 1960, I strongly suspect that these openings would most likely be exploited by the Democrats, but if anybody of either party is found guilty, they should be shot. Literally, not figuratively.
The Dems in Florida demanded electronic voting machines after 2000. We fill in a circle next to the name with a Sharpie. Works everytime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.