Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Your Rights Online

Electronic Voting: Your Worst Nightmares are True 904

jfreon writes "On Democracy Now Bev Harris of BlackBoxVoting fame, disclosed (near the end of the transcript) that in the compromised 1.8Gigs off Diebold's FTP site they uncovered "an actual election file containing actual votes on election day from San Luis Obispo County, California". Problem is, the date stamp was 3:31pm - during voting hours! The Diebold system uses a wireless network card. Worse: "So that means if they can pull the information in, they can also send information back into those machines. ""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Electronic Voting: Your Worst Nightmares are True

Comments Filter:
  • by snarfer ( 168723 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:03PM (#6872274) Homepage
    The Commonweal Institute has compiled quite a bit of information [commonwealinstitute.org] (scroll down to the links) about the problems with electronic voting machines.
  • by Captain Pooh ( 177885 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:09PM (#6872374)
    Here is another episode [democracynow.org] where they talk about Electronic Voting. Dan Wallach a professor of computer science at Rice University is the guest. He is the one who wrote a report about Electronic voting [avirubin.com]
  • by tunesmith ( 136392 ) <[siffert] [at] [museworld.com]> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:12PM (#6872421) Homepage Journal
    Don't just complain, act: There is a bill in Congress introduced by Rush Holt, D-NJ. It is called "The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003". It is H.R. 2239. It currently has 29 cosponsors and needs more support. The Summary page is here [loc.gov]. The press page is here [house.gov]. Congress is in session again now. Contact your Congressperson and demand they support this bill. It would require a voter-verifiable paper trail.
  • by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:18PM (#6872499)
    According to the latest "State of the first Amendment" [freedomforum.org] those "basic" questions would disqualify 98% of Americans from voting. Only 80% would be disqualified if they only had to know 2 of the 5 clauses in the First Amendment, and a mere 42% would be disqualified if they only had to know about the freedom of speech.
  • by Lulu of the Lotus-Ea ( 3441 ) <mertz@gnosis.cx> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:22PM (#6872563) Homepage
    I posted a comment on a related thread mentioning the project I am involved in, EVM2003 [sourceforge.net]. We had a slightly rocky start, as project do, but things are underway.

    The idea of EVM2003 is to create Free Software voting machine, and to implement machines that also produce voter-verifiable paper trails (i.e. visually readable printed ballots). We will do a number of security things right, where the commercial companies have done them wrong... they have aimed for "security through obscurity" or "just trust us." As well, part of our requirement is to have fully blind-accessible voting that maintains complete anonymity.

    Anyway, I (David Mertz [mailto]) have taken over as Developer Lead recently, and am trying to get the development of the demo rolling. Part of that effort is recruiting some more developers, and splitting the project into several only loosely connected parts. Feel free to contact me--the standard ballot system (in the demo version at least) is being done in wxPython; but conceivably we would choose other languages/technologies for bar-code reading, printing, blind-voting, etc. (my preference is to use Python though, for consistency and rapid development).

  • Re:Is better than... (Score:3, Informative)

    by El ( 94934 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:23PM (#6872575)
    The point in Minority Report was that wood grain patterns are like fingerprints, no two alike. This means counterfeit balls wouldn't work, but it also means the none of the votes are anonymous. This violates one of the basic tenets of voting, that you should not be able to trace the vote back to any specific voter.
  • Now all we need... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Goner ( 5704 ) <nutate@@@hotmail...com> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:26PM (#6872618) Homepage

    is someone who's not afraid of a $250,000 max. fine and a 5 year max. federal prison sentence to electronically write in Kermit the Frog for president. Seems like it would be impossible change the outcome of even a local election without getting caught if the election wasn't tight, but not that hard if it was.

    If you're diabolical enough to want to change the outcome of an election for whatever reason, you could probably find a way to circumvent any elections system, be they paper ballots or mind reading machines from the 24 and a half century. Either by direct bribes to registered voters, or dissuading blocks of voters through disinformation, etc.

    As others have said, support the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003 [loc.gov] by writing or calling your representative. At least we can try to make it harder for fraud to occur.

  • by missing000 ( 602285 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:29PM (#6872657)
    problem with that is it is likley that DIEBOLD also knows this and is willing to sell this info to different political parties and lobby groups.

    Yep. And guess what party that woud be?

    From the article:

    According to Harris, a study of the campaign contributions made by Diebold and its employees revealed an unusual pattern: Hundreds of thousands of dollars were being funneled to a few Republican candidates with very little to any other party.
  • by Arandir ( 19206 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:41PM (#6872809) Homepage Journal
    Your votes are being scammed to keep the neocon scum in power.

    Just remember that it was the liberal Democrats who were in power at the time of the election, both nationally and in the Florida legislature. It was the liberal Democrats who demanded that pregnant and hanging chads, double punches, and votes for Buchanan, all be counted as votes for Gore. It was the liberal Democrats who argued that absentee ballots from oversea military personnel shouldn't be counted.
  • Re:Congressperson?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Misch ( 158807 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:44PM (#6872845) Homepage
    Be species-neutral too. Call them Congresscritters.

    And he's not making it up, that's what it says on the House [house.gov] website.

    "Write Your Representative - Contact your Congressperson in the U.S. House of Representatives."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:47PM (#6872889)
    This [diebold.com] is the machine I've seen in the SLO polling places. Note the features section. Specifically, "Teleresults for timely modem transmission of precinct results". :(

    It doesn't mean the machines talked to each other. It means they talked to the server running GEMS (Global Election Management System).
  • by thomas.galvin ( 551471 ) <slashdot&thomas-galvin,com> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:55PM (#6872996) Homepage
    What the author means is that, if communication in one direction is possible, communication in the other direction is also possible. These are closed systems; if it is network aware enough to send a file, it may also be aware enough to recieve a file, thus altering the voting record, and there is no way we can know about it. I believe his point is that the machines themselves should not be connected while voting is taking place.
  • by badasscat ( 563442 ) <basscadet75@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @05:45PM (#6873562)
    The first amendment does NOT state that God should be kept out of government affairs.

    This clause, however, does:

    Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

    Note also that it does not restrict state governments in this area at all.

    Again, the above clause does. Any law based on religion passed by a state government must be consistent and not conflict with the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. You cannot, therefore, pass a law that says, for example, that you cannot take the Lord's name in vain, as that violates the First Amendment.

    This should be obvious but your comments force me to point it out once again. Most laws I could think of based on religion that aren't also based on common morality (ie. "thou shalt not kill") would conflict with the Constitution in some way. You couldn't say the Pope is the ultimate judge of whether a convicted killer lives or dies, for example - that's up to the Supreme Court, according to the Constitution. This clause was partly (or possibly mainly) intended to promote separation of church and state.
  • by cicho ( 45472 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @06:01PM (#6873731) Homepage
    You do not own the Slashdot home page. Diebold have 'owner' privilege on their machines.
  • read scoop.co.nz (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2003 @06:51PM (#6874178)
  • Re:That's a good one (Score:2, Informative)

    by Datafage ( 75835 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @07:01PM (#6874285) Homepage
    In the Florida elections thousands of people, mostly black Democrats, were delisted for being felons. The vast majority of these felonies did not take place and were dated up to a milennium in the future. Further, the list was comprised of people who had moved from Texas to Florida. The Floridan Democrats barred from voting were not actually felons, they were locked out as a favor from one Bush to the other.
  • by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @07:08PM (#6874343)


    > Imperialism is more the kind of thing that Hussein was into, in his conquest of areas of Iraq not populated by people of his nationality.

    Oddly enough, the "multi-national" Iraq was a creation of the Western powers, not of Saddam's conquests. During a couple of recent world wars those powers had a nasty habit of promising everything to everyone in the Middle East in order to tempt them into dancing to our tune instead of the other side's, and then giving them a big shaft when the war was over and we didn't think we needed them anymore. (Speaking of which, we've actually tried democracy in Iraq before, and the system ultimately produced Saddam himself after the usual sequences of coups.)

    Saddam did try a land grab along the banks of the Tigris, which resulted in the dreadful Iran-Iraq war with its estimated million combat casualties, and of course he tried to annex Kuwait by force. Strictly speaking these were revanchism rather than imperialism, though the practical diffence is dubious, to say nothing of Saddam's claim to be the man for the job.

    And to clarify:

    > Imperialism is more the kind of thing that Hussein was into, in his conquest [...]

    Imperialism does not always involve direct conquest. The Romans were past masters at setting up "client states", i.e. puppet governments that would dance to their tune instead of their rival's, without actually annexing them. Surely no one needs to point out the parallels with what's going on in Iraq. (E.g., the USA claims to be providing Iraq with democracy, but won't let go of the puppet strings even to get the desperately needed soldiers and money from the UN. Don't pretend the USA doesn't intend to set up a "democratic" government that will dance to the USA's tunes and none other.)

    Add "client state" to your vocabulary, and go back to hear what that English professor has to say.

  • by missing000 ( 602285 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @07:39PM (#6874596)
    I am not under the impression that the Democrats are without blame, but I never heard that Dan Rostenkowski commited voter fraud.

    The 17 counts he went to jail on were for mail fraud and paying people to do nothing.

    Maybe there is a better example? Say in Chicago
  • Re:More headlines... (Score:5, Informative)

    by penguin7of9 ( 697383 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @07:44PM (#6874651)
    Please provide the source for your statement. Otherwise it should be modded as -1 for troll.

    Look around the web on site:

    here [thenation.com],
    here [washingtonpost.com],
    here [guardian.co.uk],
    here [commondreams.org], and lots more places.

    It is clear that the majority intent of Florida's voters was to send Gore to the White House. Furthermore, it is clear that Florida's voting process was seriously biased against minorities, who predominantly vote Democratic.

    The only reason why this wasn't discovered during the recount was because the Bush family managed to cut the recount short as long as it was still favorable for Bush.

    Or we need to add a new mod of "+1 strong opinion of of a bitter loser."

    With Bush as president, we all are losing: we are getting wars, economic problems, huge budget deficits, a failing educational system, rollback of civil rights protections, deterioration of international relations, etc.

    It is pretty depressing that Republicans care more about who the President had sex with than about how the country is doing.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2003 @08:24PM (#6874959)
    ...If, as you suggest, the landslide was fraudulent, then the election results would have no relation to either the pre-election polls or the exit polling.

    Oh, like the 2002 election: VNS cites problems with exit polls [cnn.com]

    For more on Hagel refer to If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines [commondreams.org]

  • Re:That's a good one (Score:3, Informative)

    by cheezedawg ( 413482 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @08:27PM (#6874978) Journal
    No, no, no. Lets take this one point at a time, because your facts are pretty messed up.

    In the Florida elections thousands of people, mostly black Democrats, were delisted for being felons.

    The felon list that was compiled for the 2000 election did not "delist" anybody from voting. The list was given to the individual county supervisors, and they were required to verify the names on the list before any action was taken. And even if action was taken, the people were given written notice with a procedure to appeal the decision.

    The vast majority of these felonies did not take place and were dated up to a milennium in the future. Further, the list was comprised of people who had moved from Texas to Florida.

    The only people claiming that the "vast majority" of the list was incorrect are partisan pundits with an axe to grind. Even so, it is irrelevant. The legislature intended the list to cast as wide of a net as possible to reduce the possibility that an ineligible voter would slip through. There were mistakes on the list, but that does not conflict with its stated purpose.

    The Floridan Democrats barred from voting were not actually felons, they were locked out as a favor from one Bush to the other.

    This had nothing to do with Jeb Bush or even Katherine Harris. The Legislature passed the law, and a democrat elections supervisor (Ethel Baxtor) contracted with a company to generate the list. Oh, and when the Federal Elections Commission held hearings on the Florida Election, they could not find a single person that was wrongly prevented from voting because of the list.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2003 @08:29PM (#6874990)
    "exit polling"? This is a thing of the past - in 2002, the Voter News Service (VNS) pulled the plug on reporting their election night results. [scoop.co.nz] It seems that there was some sort of problem, possibly that exit polls weren't tracking with reported election results. (Remember that exit polls were what led several networks to believe more Floridans thought they voted for Al Gore, a prediction that later turned out to be accurate.)

    In several races with electronic voting machines, there were noticeable differences between pre-election polls and the actual election results. In Georgia, both Roy Barnes and Max Cleland led their opponents [ledger-enquirer.com] until the actual election.

    Other Dieboldalical results (from a source found via Google) are here [ezboard.com].

    Chuck Hagel's opponent wanted a hand-recount, but by the terms of the signed contract, it was illegal for government election workers to review the votes [commondreams.org].

    Short form: what you describe happened, and you didn't even notice. (Final tinfoil hat moment - did we mention that there was a file named "rob-georgia" containing patches not tested by the state on the Diebold FTP site? [scoop.co.nz])

  • FUD Alert (Score:2, Informative)

    by jfmiller ( 119037 ) * on Thursday September 04, 2003 @09:03PM (#6875173) Homepage Journal
    Speaking as a Voter of San Luis Obispo County who voted in this election, I woul like to clarify that there IS a paper balit which is scaned and recorded. While having the electronic comprimised is a Big problem, there is paper to go back to (for the moment)

    As a side note, you can bet I'll be calling the county clerks office tomorrow.

    JFMILLER
  • Re:More headlines... (Score:3, Informative)

    by ddimas ( 629883 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @09:25PM (#6875293)
    I don't care if this gets modded as a troll, it needs to be said.

    You mentioned Clinton's sexual escapades, now let's talk about Bush's escapades.

    I.) Bush LIED about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He's STILL LYING! Not one has been found since the war started, not one was used. American soldiers are dying because of this lie. For this alone George W. Bush should be IMPEACHED! The charge is treason.

    II.) Bush said the war in Iraq was about terrorism. Why is it that, when the secret proceedings of the Energy policy hearings Chaired by Cheney were finally extracted from the White House by court order, they showed the Bush team carving up Iraq, months before 9/11? More treason, they were going to go to war with Iraq from the begining, 9/11 was an excuse.

    III.) The Patriot act was some thousands of pages long. Do you really think it was written up after 9/11?

    IV.) In case you missed it

    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/09 /04/159216

    V.) Finally, since you mentioned Clinton, what did an affair with an intern have to do with a real estate deal that happened a thousand miles away and a decade before? Did I mention that no charges were brought on that matter because Clinton did nothing wrong?

  • by randyest ( 589159 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @09:30PM (#6875320) Homepage
    It never ceases to amaze me how so many otherwise technically savvy people buy into the notion that hardware is infallible and software is always to blame for "glitches" or "crashes." I would concede that software causes more problems, but the notion that "computers don't make mistakes" is remarkably wrong.

    No chip ever made is tested 100%. Test coverage of 99.0% is considered excellent in the ASIC and custom IC design worlds. Many go to fab with less than 95%, sometimes 90% test coverage. So you have 10 million gates on a hunk of stuff you grew and screenprinted with toxic chemicals, with a decent plan to make sure that 99.0% of them can be tested to work as they should. You do the math -- lots will fail, and worse, some will fail occasionally and then resume working. Moreover, we can't really test all posible sets of stimulus -- that would take an incredibly long time in an industry where tester time on billion-dollar testers is doled out in 5s increments (30s is considered unworkable by most fabs, and would still allow us to test less than 1% of all possible combinations of inputs and transitions).

    The interconnect between chips is another problem that's hard to measure, but non-zero. Same with passive components (capacitors, resistors) -- they have non-zero non-fatal failure rates. Which is an obfuscatory way of saying they can "glitch" or "crash". Thank Ohm a resistor's reboot time is much faster than Windows or you'd really notice the hardware failures :)

    I don't have time to go into system-wide signal integrity (intractable), fault-tolerance that isn't, metastability, radiative interference such as cosmic rays and alpha particles emitted from local metals, etc. There's a lot that can and does go wrong in hardware.

    I'm really kind of reluctant to post this, since as a hardware designer it's cool that I never hear the "you're why my computer crashes" comments that my software engineers suffer. It's also fun to se MS take the brunt of most PC users reliability complaints. In truth, they probably deserve a lot of it, but not the 100% most believe -- hardware does sometimes fail for a microsecond and then recover nonchalantly, as if nothing happened, sort of like when a cat trips or runs into a wall.
  • Re:That's a good one (Score:3, Informative)

    by cheezedawg ( 413482 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @10:27PM (#6875620) Journal
    Yes, and when all the votes were recounted in Florida, Al Gore won the state.

    Not quite.
    http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/s tories/main.html [cnn.com]
    On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Florida Supreme Court ruling ordering a full statewide hand recount of all undervotes not yet tallied. The U.S. Supreme Court action effectively ratified Florida election officials' determination that Bush won by a few hundred votes out of more than 6 million cast.

    Using the NORC data, the media consortium examined what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened. The Florida high court had ordered a recount of all undervotes that had not been counted by hand to that point. If that recount had proceeded under the standard that most local election officials said they would have used, the study found that Bush would have emerged with 493 more votes than Gore.
  • by BevHarris ( 700957 ) on Friday September 05, 2003 @12:18AM (#6876359)
    The file was in a zipped directory. Inside the zipped directory, the file save date was preserved intact.

    Also, the file contains an audit long of some 1,000 automated voting program events dating back to spring 2000. This file was March 5, 2002 and had dozens of identifiers to prove it, including audit log items. Also, the votes matched the final tally, proportionately, since they weren't all in yet.

    Of course, the elections supervisor swears it wasn't her staff that put it on the FTP site, and Diebold swears none of theirs did it.

    However, the password on the file was "Sophia" and Diebold has an employee who is a voting machine tech named "Sophia" and the S.L.O. County elections officials told me that Diebold's Sophia was on site on the election day this file was used.

    Seems to me highly likely that Sophia put that file on the Diebold web site, and that she did so on election day, since that's the day she was there.

    See ya. Bev Harris Black Box Voting

  • Re:That's a good one (Score:5, Informative)

    by willtsmith ( 466546 ) on Friday September 05, 2003 @12:25AM (#6876395) Journal
    The NORC data did not "count" votes. This was the great con. All they did was note the condition of undercounted ballots:

    For example:

    "Voter puched the 'Al Gore' punch. Voter emphasized the vote by CIRCLING the punch. Voter further empasized their intention by writing AL GORE on the ballot.
    Cannot count as Al Gore because we're not counting."

    The Miami Herald did a similar study that actually COUNTED the ballots and found Al Gore the winner.

    The true story of the election can be found at www.gregpalast.com. Yes, Greg Palast DOES have an axe to grind. He hates liars and hypocrites. The first two chapters of "The Best Democracy Money" is available their.

    To summarize:
    DBT Online/ChoicePoint was selected as a high-ball at $2.3 million dollars. The company who had previously did the job charged $5700.

    They were supposed to record cross-checking against public databases and verification phone calls. They did none of this. They were instructed NOT TO.

    ChoicePoint was instructed to search for similar names and reduced Jack to John etc... It was supposed to create the maximum number of matches provided the individuals.

    The County offices were ORDERED to scrub everyone on the list without doing verification because ChoicePoint was SUPPOSED to have done that verification.

    " The State of Florida was content with a partial match of four: names( the first four letters were good enough), ate of birth, gender and race. Not even the address or state mattered in the mad dash to maximize the number of citizens stripped of their civil rights."
    - The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, p56

    Of course you probably listen to Rush. AS if he hastened spent 6 hours a day grinding axes for the last 15 years.
  • by BevHarris ( 700957 ) on Friday September 05, 2003 @12:27AM (#6876408)
    In fact, in one of the source code files from the Windows operating system, B-Square, the company that did the CE programming for Diebold on the file, had a notation that it was only to be used read-only.

    The very FIRST change in the file, made by Diebold, was to switch it to read-write.

    There are also changes in Windows to remove authentication, and they apparently stripped out some of the security features designed for the interface between CE and NT, in order to make it backwards compatible for Windows 98 and 95.

    They then represented the Windows software to certifiers as "COTS" (Commercial Off The Shelf) even though it was CE, and therefore customized from the get-go.

    My favorite code comment, found in one of the nk.bin files: "We stole this part from some dead guy."

    Cheers.

    Bev Harris Black Box Voting

  • by BevHarris ( 700957 ) on Friday September 05, 2003 @12:40AM (#6876487)
    California allows only one-half of one percent of the precincts in the state to be audited. That means, if you rig an optical scan machine, you have a 99.5% chance of going undetected.

    Add to that the ubiquitous "computer glitch" which seems to the the plausible deniability excuse of choice. Do a Lexis-Nexis search with the words "glitch" and "election" and you'll see that many elections have been miscounted by these machines, including many that flip the race to the wrong candidate, even when the contest is not particularly close.

    Bev Harris
    Black Box Voting
    Gun activist posts the Diebold files on new download site: "Make My Day," he challenges the lawyers -- "You are cordially invited to bite me" [blackboxvoting.org]

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...