Observer Pans Touchscreen Voting Test

riversidevoter writes "I recently observed the Logic and Accuracy 'test' given to the touchscreen voting machines in Riverside CA. Riverside County uses voting machines and software from Sequoia Voting Systems. The voting kiosks do not produce a voter-verified paper trail. As a computer programmer familiar with software testing, I was really disappointed at what I saw." Read on for his critical observations of the demonstration.

riversidevoter continues: "WinEDS, the program that is used to count votes, was only tested in a pre-election mode. The software was not tested in the configuration that it would be in on election day.

In addition to that, people signed a form that said that they had verified the results of the test before the test had finished running. Mischelle Townsend, the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, told Salon that the form that people signed was just an attendance form. But the form clearly states 'We the undersigned declare that we observed the process of logic and accuracy testing of voting equipment performed by the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, as required by law and that all tests performed resulted in accurate voting of all units tested, including both touchscreen and absentee systems.'

You can see a copy of the Salon article here. You can see a copy of the form that people signed here.

I also believe that the observation group that witnessed the test was given a misleading description of Sequoia's system. For example, the fact that the votes are transferred from the DRE to a SQL Server database to be counted was never fully disclosed to all the members of the group.

Also, the sheer number of times that the phrase 'proprietary operating system' was used, among other things, helped to create the impression that Sequoia's system is not as reliant on Microsoft Windows as it really is.

I have created a website about this issue; please take a look at it.

On the website you can find my report on what happened that day (which outlines several problems I haven't mentioned in this posting) as well as some supporting documents. There is a letter and a note from Mischelle Townsend in which she mentions mailing the results to people or having the test results be picked up 'afterwards'...."

Oh Boy....

[H8X55]

Just when you thought FloridaGate 2000 was out of everyone's mind, we bring you CaliforniaGate 2004: Rise of the Machines

In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

People who used the new voting system are believed to have voted for an independent operating system, dispite the fact that the test was on a faux-presidential race.

According to this text Linux was voted into the White House. We suspect Apache will be selected as running mate, though rumors say Samba is also a consideration.

Easy solution to this issue.

[darkonc]

Let's just hold a vote to decide this issue and get it over with!

I'll supply the hardware.

Way cool..

[SoSueMe]

I wish I could get user acceptance sign-off before I started testing.

Re:Oh Boy....

[acidrain69]

Don't blame florida, blame the country for sending it's parents/grandparents to retire here :)

Eventually

[BigGez]

Just think, eventually we'll all be getting pop-up ads telling us who to vote for, while we're in the booths!

Re:this is the most serious threat to America

[Dhalka226]

This electronic voting is the most serious threat to America that we have seen in our lifetimes. This electronic voting is the most serious threat to America that we have seen in our lifetimes. They either want to subvert the voting process themselves, or want to create a system that is easy to subvert at a vastly lower cost than current systems. I have just one question: Was there a shooter on the grassy knoll??? You conspiracy theorists make me sick. If you feel the system is insecure (and it is), that is one thing. Assuming people are deliberately trying to compromise the voting process is quite another. I'd laugh my ass off if these companies popped you with a libel lawsuit.