Posted on 09/18/2006 6:28:50 PM PDT by dickmc
Like other computer scientists who have studied Diebold voting machines, we were surprised at the apparent carelessness of Diebolds security design. It can be hard to convey this to nonexperts, because the examples are technical. To security practitioners, the use of a fixed, unchangeable encryption key and the blind acceptance of every software update offered on removable storage are rookie mistakes; but nonexperts have trouble appreciating this. Here is an example that anybody, expert or not, can appreciate:
The access panel door on a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine the door that protects the memory card that stores the votes, and is the main barrier to the injection of a virus can be opened with a standard key that is widely available on the Internet.
On Wednesday we did a live demo for our Princeton Computer Science colleagues of the vote-stealing software described in our paper and video. Afterward, Chris Tengi, a technical staff member, asked to look at the key that came with the voting machine. He noticed an alphanumeric code printed on the key, and remarked that he had a key at home with the same code on it. The next day he brought in his key and sure enough it opened the voting machine.
This seemed like a freakish coincidence until we learned how common these keys are.
Chriss key was left over from a previous job, maybe fifteen years ago. He said the key had opened either a file cabinet or the access panel on an old VAX computer. A little research revealed that the exact same key is used widely in office furniture, electronic equipment, jukeboxes, and hotel minibars. Its a standard part, and like most standard parts its easily purchased on the Internet. We bought several keys from an office furniture key shop they open the voting machine too. We ordered another key on eBay from a jukebox supply shop. The keys can be purchased from many online merchants.
Using such a standard key doesnt provide much security, but it does allow Diebold to assert that their design uses a lock and key. Experts will recognize the same problem in Diebolds use of encryption they can say they use encryption, but they use it in a way that neutralizes its security benefits.
The bad guys dont care whether you use encryption; they care whether they can read and modify your data. They dont care whether your door has a lock on it; they care whether they can get it open. The checkbox approach to security works in press releases, but it doesnt work in the field.
*******************************************
Also, see the Princeton site at http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ for the related Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine
Finally, a system I can support.
Well, yeah, but can you chill martini fixins in the Diebold?
ROFL! That ROCKS!
Cynthia McKinney won!!
This means that Ted Kennedy now has total control of all voting in Massachusetts!
"They minitiarized an entire voting machine just for me."
Some libs in the media and acadamia now believe they may not win the house and could possibly end up drawing even or winning just 1-2 seats. So, they are now laying the groundwork for the typical post election tirades like
"They stole the election by manipulating the machines"
or one of numerous variations of the above.
Sorry, but the peeples are growing rather weary of your chicken little impersonations.
One other thing: Is it not interesting that whenever these supposed things occur, it only happens to Democratic voters in districts run by Democrats?
You would think that if this liberal could come up with a program that supposedly alters the vote count that there would be other technically savvy liberals that would go after Republican votes using the same method.
Oh, I forgot, liberals would NEVER manipulate the vote. That is something that only those mean and nasty conservatives do /sarcasm>
I have yet to see a 'machine' or computer that malfunctions only when someone of a certain party votes.
I want to meet whoever wrote that program and just might hire them!!
I think there are some serious concerns with the new computerized voting. I'd be much happier if there was an actual paper trail of somesort and something that could be verified. Eventually we'll have an incidence where someone hacks these machines and changes the results of an election. Given how the Dems have behaved in recent elections, I wouldn't be shocked if they don't find ways to cheat on these systems.
Please! We all know that only Republicans would manipulate the vote. After all, the only bitching we hear after each election comes from the Democrats!
I am not worried about a malfunction as much as a hacker, a virus or maybe a cabal of diebold machine genius poll workers working in unison across the country.
Not true. I bitch about the illegals voting, the dead voting and multiple votes for 1 person. That is also a real problem. They don't even ask for photo ID's here in CA.
If you kick a Diebold machine in the right place, a little window slides up and you get to see the naked dancing girl inside.
I don't trust these machines for nothing. There should always be a backup hardcopy of each ballot in case the election is close and a recount is ordered.
It did seem odd that all the voters in Cynthia McKinney's district exited their voting booth with macademia nuts.
Yes, but a machine with a vote stealing virus can switch votes from one party to another and the votes count would match.
Of course, I agree with South Park creators. Our choice of candidates is almost always between Turd Sandwich or Giant Douche.
I think you read the memo wrong...Kennedy now has total control of all Mass. mini-bars.
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.