Diebold to Pay $2.6M Due to Insecure Voting Machines 370
sunilk writes "In a short period, Diebold has been at the center of several problems. Now it seeks to settle the lawsuit filed against it by the State of California by paying $2.6 million. Settlement comes because of flaws in the Diebold systems that could compromise election results."
I hope they don't just settle... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let them settle, but what does it solve? (Score:2, Insightful)
They may or may not settle, but I don't see the point. Just moving a lump sum of money may serve as punishment / compensation, but doesn't do anything about the issues with these voting machines, does it? Better to have Diebold work on that. Or better yet, stop relying on electronic voting machines at all.
There are 4 boxes in defense of liberty... ah, you know the drill.
I still can't wrap my head around the fact.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just let that sink in for a few minutes. We took the single most important tool of citizenship... and SOLD IT.
What the fuck is wrong with our country?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem (Score:4, Insightful)
You can't. Make the vote. A trade secret.
The internal workings of mechanical voting machines, at least, are well-documented and understood, at least according to my stepfather who works in the NYC Board of Elections.
Re:I hope they don't just settle... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I hope they don't just settle... (Score:3, Insightful)
Here in techno maniac Finland we also use these mysterious devices. Then we use our hands and eyes to count scribbles on the ballots. Long time ago I was asked to be election monitor and it wasn't very difficult to count couple of thousand votes. There was three of us and it took about thirty minutes. Of course we don't have dog catcher elections etc. only one or two ballot items at a time.
Hope your guy wins next time.
Re:I hope they don't just settle... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm unclear. Who get's the 2.6 million? The government they just chose?
Their stock rose on the settlement (Score:3, Informative)
2.6 million? (Score:5, Insightful)
Disgusting.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:5, Insightful)
After all, attempting to overthrow the government actually ranks as a crime up with murder. Both carry life sentences, though I'm not sure if both still can carry the death penalty.
When terrorists tried it, we started a war.
When a company on home soil trys it, they get a ticket
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Insightful)
That goes beyond incompetence - I'm sure they understood and knew full well what they were doing. They have lawyers - they knew the details of their contract. They broke it knowingly and willingly.
Just b/c nothing 'bad' happened (depending on your feelings of the outcome of the election, of course) doesn't mean that it wasn't a possiblity. They knew what the problems were - they were well documented - and never fixed.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:3, Interesting)
negligence: the trait of neglecting responsibilities and lacking concern
Sorry, but my definition doesn't really define gross negligence. Had they merely neglected to fix known security issues, it would be negligence. However, they made changes AFTER government certification. That's a little beyond negligence, that hints at malicious intent. After all, why would one make changes to a system after being certified - if not to compromise it in som
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Insightful)
your attempts to label diebold's gross negligence as "treason" clearly lacks legal standing.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate Diebold as much as the next person and think their CEO is a slimy Republican asshat...
...but never underestimate incompetence or "left hand does not know what the right hand is doing" problems in a large corporation, or what they can do.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2)
As a followup, the Constitution also defines the evidence requirements: two witnesses to the same overt act. Makes it very difficult to convict someone of it. Which is why in modern times we just declare them enemy combatants, strip their citizenship, and send them to Gitmo.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2)
These assholes deserve it, too.
Re:Blame California (Score:2)
Business as usual (Score:2)
Welcome to the corporate shield. Finding a corporation is easy - finding individuals within that corporation to be criminally culpable for the corporation's actions is much, much more difficult (financial fraud is a somewhat exceptional case, in case Enron et al come to mind).
All too often, this reduces their following the law to be a mere matter of cost-benefit analysis. If it makes them more money, they break the law, pay the fine... and profit.
Re:2.6 million? (Score:2)
(Maybe it's arnolds new buisness plan.)
Re:2.6 million? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sounds good to me. Send the marshalls to padlock the doors and block their bank accounts, and hold it that way for the duration of the sentance. Even if it's just a slap on the wrist, say, six months. They might end up defaulting on other contractual obligations, and some innocent bystanders might lose some money, but that happens all the time when criminals go to the slammer. They can always sue.
Of course, there might be some individuals who're
I have to ask (Score:5, Insightful)
Something to the effect of the vendors machines being overhauled at the expense of the vendor or removed permanently in the state seems a bit more fitting for this degree of failure.
Re:I have to ask (Score:3, Interesting)
That would only amount to a mere refund.
After a vender sold you a defective product and caused you irreperable harm you would be entitled to damages as well.
And if recklessness or negligence were proved, you would be entitled to punitive damages.
What value does your vote have? Perhaps all the taxes you paid in 4 years?
Who k
Re:I have to ask (Score:3, Interesting)
I mean it's not like they do any improtant business with anyone like Bank of America, or Wells Fargo. Is it? Or American Express, E-Trade, or any other financial institution that uses ATM machines...
That I think would hurt them. I put the restriction of four years as I think that is a reasonable period considering the offense related to elections. Some might suggest 6 years
Re:I have to ask (Score:2)
Are any of those state chartered institutions in California?
Granted that you'll put a hurt on smaller institutions in California (probably not Diebold though) by making them scramble to keep any Diebold ATMs under service during your ban on their business.
Re:I have to ask (Score:2)
Granted I could be wrong all about that.
While banks may have a scramble getting new contracts in place, the hardware would be supported by NCR or some other vendor, and may very well be replaced with NCR and Fujitsu machines fairly quickly.
Diebold's largest business may be ATM m
Re:I have to ask (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that Diebold could be replaced as a servicer if that is who a given bank is using, but by requiring that you're hurting local businesses (the state chartered banks) as much as Diebold.
The Cost to Diebold (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately most of the focus appears to be to accuse Diebold of trying to steer the election toward the Republicans. While that would be a bad thing of awesome proportions, I think all the talk abou it misses the point.
The real issue is having an open, verifiable ballot box, so *no one* can abuse the ballot device to affect the results of an election.
Diebold wants a closed, "certified" ballot box. I don't think they want it that way to influence elections. I think they want it that way because they see secrecy as their best road to a profit. Never mind ensuring the correctness of their programs through open review; that would cost them a business advantage (they think).
California's fault (Score:4, Insightful)
Now it seeks to settle the lawsuit filed against it by the State of California by paying $2.6 million.
IMHO, this is California's fault for going with Diebold's systems despite being told well and truly before the elections that these voting machines were insecure. Why do they believe the critics now?
Anyways, I'll bet they still use electronic voting machines come next election.
Took them long enough (Score:5, Interesting)
Come election day, half of the machines booted into Windows CE Explorer instead of the voting software... whoops
So now, the hardware is being re-certified, the old voting equipment is gone, and San Diego is using (Diebold Manufactured) optical scanners for voting on a temporary basis.
If these issues (and expenses) have been present in other counties of California, I fail to see how 2.6mil is a decent settlement. Sorry.
Re:Took them long enough (Score:2)
$2.6 million... (Score:5, Insightful)
So that's how much our the future of our nation is worth? Insecure voting machines that play a part in determining who is elected to office...and it's only worth $2.6 million? What a bunch of B.S., $2.6 million is nothing close to what they should pay, if you ask me.
Re:$2.6 million... (Score:2)
That's it? (Score:5, Funny)
Well if democracy costs $2.6 million, how much for a quasi-constitutional theocracy?
Re:That's it? (Score:2)
Re:That's it? (Score:2)
Or Florida. Which ever you prefer.
Re:That's it? (Score:2)
You got it backwards... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you need to switch those two...
No kidding. (Score:3, Insightful)
America is a country where anything and everything is for sale. In America you can buy a kidney, you can buy a vote, you can buy a womb if you don't want to carry your own child, you can even buy a child, heck you can have children imported from other parts of the world.
All perfectly legal.
Americans used to think that it would be an abomination to buy and sell children, organs, or rent space in a woman's womb for 9 months but not anymore.
It's funny but si
Re:That's it? (Score:4, Insightful)
What I keep hearing is that all those people who voted for Bush on election day based on their religious beliefs are idiots and stupid and in some cases I hear that they don't even deserve their vote/life(yes I have heard people advocate death for the "Moral Majority"). In anycase, I was watching SNL tonight and there was this lovely skit/cartoon where Santa descided that he would no longer deliver presents to the "Red States" because they were now part of "DumbAssinstan" or somesuch. It ended with a little girl calling Santa a bigot because he was saying that all these people were idiots just cause they let a little thing like religion influence them. She also said that Santa was becoming the very thing that he hated. I must say that I love the truth of satire.
Now, just in case I have not yet made my point, let me just make a few more observations. Everyone who sits there and says that the religious right is automatically stupid and should not be allowed to vote is basically saying that someone is automatically stupid and should be disallowed the right to vote because of their skin color, because they hold a certain job, or because they happen to read slashdot(well this last one might be true). Democracy is about the citizens taking and _ALL_ their beliefs and trying to form a moderate goverment that is as best as it can be for entire country. Now some may believe that the current goverment is not best or optimal or whatever. The majority of the nation has spoken and there must be a reason for it. Now it may be through voter fraud, but from talking to actual people I can tell you there is a reason that the Democratic party and the majority of the "left" is completely missing. Stop making excuses and figure out why a nation would vote for someone they know lied to them outright(Well I think we did it twice, Clinton and Bush but thats irrelavant).
For those still hung up on all the alleged voter fraud, let me leave this last nugget of truth with you. The Democratic party has a much longer and more worrisome record of voter fraud and all out vote buying than the Republican party ever could. In West Virginia there is a saying that goes something like this, "When I die, bury me in Logan County so even after I am dead I can still vote." Now the funny thing is, historically the Democrats have always done better amoung the dead getting nearly 100% of their vote. So isn't all of this a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black?
I personally think both parties are dirty and need to be destroyed. A little revolt now and again can be healthy. Also don't dilute yourself by thinking that the parties are all that different, they both have the same corpreate masters.
Re:That's it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have no problems with people voting based on their religious beliefs as long as they also take everything else into consideration (why vote for a warmonger just because he claims to have the same religious beliefs as you?)
The thing that really wound me up though was one of the TV interviews I saw with a Bus
Re:That's it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Offtopic how? Yes, maybe rant like but very much on topic. You said that a democracy had been bought and made a comment about a theocracy that was very much an insinuation. You opened the door.
Nowhere did I say the "moral majority" were "stupid" by any standard. Nor did I call any of them bigots. Maybe you want to reply to a thread a little more in tune with your inferiority complex?
No, I never said you called anyone else a bigot nor did I ever call anyo
Re:That's it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't care how much popular support creation has among the religious who read it in a 2000+ year old book. That is not scientifically valid evidence. Intelligent design doesn't try to provide an alternative explanation for all the evidence that supports the theory of evolution. Intelligent Design has about as much
punish the twits who approved using the machines (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:punish the twits who approved using the machine (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't trush Bush, and I don't trust Microsoft. Funny how those TWO things were involved in this affair.
Re:punish the twits who approved using the machine (Score:3, Insightful)
It is indeed another resounding blow struck against democracy. For a nation-building nation that appears to be set on exporting democracy at gunpoint, one would think that its own state of democracy would be setting a better example.
Iraqi politicians should start taking Diebold management out to lunch, if they haven't done so already.
(As always, any loathing contained in this post is not directed at Americans in general. It is directed purely at the current administration, the neocons and all the mod
Funny... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Funny... (Score:2)
why no criminal charges? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm disappointed that California didn't pursue criminal charges. A civil suit may be sufficient to deal with honest mistakes, but if, as seems to be the case, Diebold repeatedly made changes to software after certification, that's a deliberate malfeasance. These people need to learn that elections are serious business. These aren't candy machines.
Re:why no criminal charges? (Score:2)
Re:why no criminal charges? (Score:2)
I was disappointed initially as well, but after thinking about it, it makes some degree of sense that they didn't. After all, who would they press charges against? The CEO? A coder? The guy who actually did the software modifications after the machines were certified?
It would be much more difficult to prove malice or ill-intent of one 'mastermind' in a criminal trial, as so many different people are involved in the organization.
While I
Re:why no criminal charges? (Score:2)
Yes. They are ultimately responsible for the business activities of their company.
Presumably, the CEOs of large companies get paid so very much because of the stresses and stakes of doing their job correctly. If it's appropriate for a CEO to get a nice bonus when their company does well, I think it's appropriate for a CEO to take responsibility for the failure of a large high-profile project.
Re:why no criminal charges? (Score:3, Insightful)
Simply paying the money won't fix the situation (Score:2, Insightful)
Tell ya what (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone recall... (Score:2, Insightful)
$2.6 million dollars in nothing for something on this scale. It seems like just enough to seem serious. I don't think I'm a conspiracy theorist, but there does seem to be some kind of agenda. Oh well.
Lawyers (Score:2)
Here's one (Score:2, Interesting)
This sucks. (Score:5, Informative)
Realistically we will never know who exactly was elected this year and that's a big problem.
Until we can address the voting machine issue proper (with voter-verified votes at a minimum) Americans have lost their democracy for all intents and purposes.
Interestingly the only state that got this right was frickin Nevada. They did use the machines, but insisted that they produce voter-verified paper trails.
The rest of the nation could actually learn a thing or two from Nevada of all places.
In addition to all of that, what I find most hard to swallow is the lack of action on the part of our elected officials to avoid this mess. Election supervisors have known for years literally and bought the machines anyway.
This whole mess is a crime against the American People. People should be in jail over this. We send people away for far less (like duping a movie).
Sorry for the rant, but this issue bothers me more than any other because I cannot trust our national election. Even though I live in a state (Oregon) with a pretty solid voting system, my solid vote means nothing in light of Florida and Ohio both with significant election irregularities.
I am not convinced we actually chose our President this year. Americans should be just a bit more upset about that than they are. We get press reports on the Ukraine yet we see almost nothing about our own failed election.
Finally, this is not about who won or lost. It's that we will never actually know...
Re:This sucks. (Score:5, Funny)
Why are you trying to confuse the issue?
It is clear that voters overwelmingly choose George W. Bush to lead the nation for the next 4 years.
And these election results were specifically chosen to reflect that fact.
Re:This sucks. (Score:2)
There's a reason Nevada knows about this type of stuff. Slot machines.
Re:This sucks. (Score:2, Insightful)
Right you are, we won't actually know. Oregon may be more or less safe, but there are problems even in reasonably stable Washington state. 700 votes were mistakenly marked invalid, and state judges [nwsource.com] have chosen to block those votes from being counted. So add Washington to the list of problem states.
Other states (Score:2)
Uh, you are wrong. Nevada is not the only state that got the election technology right. They are the only ones who got touch screen voting right, but many states didn't not use touch screen voting.
as a california voter... (Score:2, Interesting)
I want an amendment to the state constitution requiring all methods of voting to have a verifiable audit trail.
I want this proposed settlement to cover the cost of implementing a verifiable audit trail in the counties that Diebold shafted. Including replacing defective machines. They broke our democracy, they're gonna pay to fix it.
That's what I want the pointy end of this lawsuit to do: patch the electronic voter fraud exploit. This is a non-partisan goal. America depends on e
The buck never stops. (Score:3, Interesting)
Diebold contributions...and the Carter Center (Score:5, Informative)
from the public record...
Crowther, John Michael Mr.
8/27/2003 $2,000.00
Canton, OH 44708
Diebold Inc. -[Contribution]
BUSH-CHENEY '04 INC
D' Amico, Thomas R. Mr.
9/3/2003 $2,000.00
Canton, OH 44718
Diebold Inc. -[Contribution]
BUSH-CHENEY '04 INC
and that
Never mind that the Carter Center, which supervises elections around the world, considers our systems fubar.
And yet I do love America still. Curious indeed.
Re:Diebold contributions...and the Carter Center (Score:4, Insightful)
So, That's how much per vote? (Score:2)
They said "trust us", then they violated that trust. End of story.
Get in the experts (Score:3, Interesting)
1. The United Nations offer a service that may be useful. There a many satisfied clients. Get the UN election observers in.
2. Swallow some of that arrogant pride and ask some of the other democacies how they do it. Most of them manage to poll their entire country (compulsory voting) with little confusion or uncertainty and even do it within the hours of 9 to 5.
Idea !
Subcontract your elections out to experts. Any of the European Union countries, Australia, New Zealand.. They can do it for you.
Re:Get in the experts (Score:3, Informative)
India is the largest democracy (by population).
Lessons from MS (and early IBM). (Score:2)
I'm going to sue paper companies... (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow, what a bunch of misplaced anger (Score:5, Funny)
whoa. (Score:5, Interesting)
The real fun begins when Disney sues to have some of it's people put in place as president instead of mickey mouse, who was unavailable at the time.
I Knew It (Score:2)
Question (Score:2, Funny)
I'm a UK citizen and was recently alarmed to find that my vote in the last election was not counted. On further investigation I find that I'm actually not allowed to vote at all! I don't understand, George W Bush took my country to war and for some reason I'm unable to vote him out of office. Can anyone explain this to me?
In regard to the topic: the idea of speeding up so called 'antiquated' voting systems with modern technology is clearly flawed. Speed up the voting = speed up the voting fraud. V
Phh, no one will care. (Score:2)
Remember, this is the country that uses intellectual elite as a pejorative term.
You wonder why public schools suck? An educated populace wouldn't toler
Death Penalty for Corporations (Score:3, Insightful)
Given recent history - Enron, Global Crossing, Diebold, Microsoft, Haliburton - I think we should implement a corporate death penalty for certain corporate crimes (esp e.g. Diebold and Haliburton - both arguably guilty of treason).
"Settlements" are bullshit. The corp pays to a set of politicians some money - those same polititicians that Diebold was cnotracted to install in office? Sounds a lot more like a kick-back than a settlement.
It's interesting that this California peice made the news - a place where apparently the politicos are willing to let Diebold settle. The situation in certain other states - Ohio, Georgia, Florida, for instance - is indicative of outright criminal activity for which the company should be brought up on charges. Treason is not to strong a word.
In order for that to work, though, there would have to be a mechanism to impose a sentence appropriate to the crime upon the corporation. Maybe seizure of assets, nullification of incorporation status, revocation of licenses. The corporate officers should also be charged and incarcerated, banned from participating in corporations or sitting on boards for some period of time.
In a case like Diebold, the siezed assets would have to be distrubuted to someone besides the politicians who paid Diebold (with public funds) to put them in office - perhaps the money could be used to finance eclections, pay for audits and recounts, etc.
Re:Death Penalty for Corporations (Score:2)
Probably cost Kevin Shelley His Career (Score:2)
Apparently our Governator has taken sides. Pity.
How to Hack Diebold Counting Software (Score:4, Informative)
-Mike
Is there any purpose to Diebold other than fraud? (Score:3, Insightful)
The Chad (Score:3, Funny)
Corporate Death Sentence! (Score:2)
Then pursue criminal charges. Surely "treason" could be on the list.
You know you're getting fucked... (Score:3, Insightful)
...when corporaitions are granted the same constitutional rights as an individual, yet face no signifigant consequences let alone anything equal to the imprisonment of an individual.
We'd live in quite a different world if corporations were held to the same standard of punishment as the individual. Say, the inability to keep their profits for 25 to life. Even better, if the major shareholders faced personal fines or imprisonment for the actions of their companies.
Corporations are the cause of everything wrong in this country. Political coruption, the war machine, polution, ad creep, health care, our health problems, blah blah blah. What we really need is the ability to rescind corporate charters.
k:pNot Just Touchscreens (Score:5, Informative)
But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure [chuckherrin.com].
Read that, and then read this [commondreams.org].
The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida [commondreams.org] knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.
And we've all seen this [portclinto...herald.com], about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?
I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud [blackboxvoting.org] going on, particularly in Florida counties.
Warren Slocum, chief elections officer, writes: (Score:4, Informative)
Elections here use big mark-sense ballots, which are scanned when they go into the locked ballot box. You mark them with a felt-tip marker, using big marks that are unambiguous. They're counted automatically, but can easily be recounted manually if necessary. Any single ballot box can be recounted and verified against the scanner results for that box, so it's easy to check the accuracy of the system.
Here's his take on Diebold: [blog-city.com]
No ambiguity there.
Slocum has an RSS feed [blog-city.com] for election issues.
not good... (Score:3, Insightful)
its just money, and that's the easy part.
bleh.
Re:Here's the way I see it. (Score:2)
Re:So, in California, a fair vote is worth (Score:2)
(And I did it multiple times on multiple people! I figure the money will balance out any negative side effects of having him in office...)
=]
Re:So, in California, a fair vote is worth (Score:2)
Re:So, in California, a fair vote is worth (Score:2)
I see you are not getting the hang of it. So, I'll put it in slashdot speak:
1. Take cash bribes in exchange for voting for Bush.
2. Vote for Bush in a heavily Democratic county of a heavily Democratic state.
3. Not care who actually *got* the vote.
4. ???
5. Profit!
Re:So, in California, a fair vote is worth (Score:3, Funny)
I propose a new moderation:
-1, Grumpy, Sarcastic, and No Sense of Humor due to Lack of Caffeine, Girls, and/or Sunlight
=]
Re:Kerry DID win California... (Score:2)
I dont care about the party BS. The voting process needs to be above reproach and beyond question.