Voting technology on verge of expansion
By LARRY BIVINS
Tennessean Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — Nashville businessman Athan Gibbs says he was more interested in serving democracy than making money when he began creating a system to address the 2000 Florida presidential vote debacle.
Today, about 36 months and $2 million later, Gibbs is positioning his company, TruVote International Inc., to take advantage of a second wave of election reform stemming from problems in Florida that delayed the result of the presidential election for 35 days. The push could produce a financial boon for his startup company.
''Really, the sky's the limit,'' said Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Nashville, a co-sponsor of legislation that seeks greater accountability in voting systems. ''It could be one of the greatest American dream stories ever told. If his technology hits, it's going to hit big.''
Gibbs, 57, is the inventor of TruVote Voter Validation and Verification System, which includes a computerized touch-screen voting machine that provides voters with a receipt. Using an identification number on the receipt, voters can verify later by computer or touch-tone telephone that their vote was recorded.
Read Article
30 December 2003
E-voting firm reports computer break-in
Federal authorities investigating VoteHere intrusion
MSNBC.COM EXCLUSIVE
By Alan Boyle
Science editor
Dec. 29, 2003
BELLEVUE, Wash. - A company developing encryption-based software for secure electronic voting has itself become the victim of a computer break-in, the company’s top executive told MSNBC.com. Federal authorities have confirmed that the incident is under investigation.
The intrusion into Bellevue-based VoteHere’s corporate network occurred in October, said Jim Adler, VoteHere’s founder, president and chief executive officer. No suspects have yet been named, but Adler said his company, in cooperation with investigators, had developed substantial information about the source of the intrusion over the past two months.
“We feel that it may have been politically motivated,” Adler said.
Adler’s revelation came amid a deepening debate over e-voting and its vulnerability to election fraud — and a controversy over surreptitious methods to get information about how e-voting software works.
E-voting firm reports computer break-in
Federal authorities investigating VoteHere intrusion
MSNBC.COM EXCLUSIVE
By Alan Boyle
Science editor
Dec. 29, 2003
BELLEVUE, Wash. - A company developing encryption-based software for secure electronic voting has itself become the victim of a computer break-in, the company’s top executive told MSNBC.com. Federal authorities have confirmed that the incident is under investigation.
The intrusion into Bellevue-based VoteHere’s corporate network occurred in October, said Jim Adler, VoteHere’s founder, president and chief executive officer. No suspects have yet been named, but Adler said his company, in cooperation with investigators, had developed substantial information about the source of the intrusion over the past two months.
“We feel that it may have been politically motivated,” Adler said.
Adler’s revelation came amid a deepening debate over e-voting and its vulnerability to election fraud — and a controversy over surreptitious methods to get information about how e-voting software works.
E-voting firm reports computer break-in
29 December 2003
Protect Your Vote: Get A Receipt! :: Intervention Magazine :: War, Politics, Culture
In the last election, we knew the election was stolen; in this election, we may not even know that much.
By John Greeley
Your vote. My vote. Reduced to electronic zeros and ones, a whisper on the wind. Was your vote tabulated? Did it actually get counted? The answer is, "Who knows?" Check the disk. OOPS. If you thought hanging chads were a pain to get counted, what do you do with electronic bits? The possibility for fraud in the absence of a paper trail is simply monumental. So if you thought the last presidential election was a mockery, wait till the electronic non-traceable trail starts with this one. A simple keystroke eliminates countless pesky votes. It was only a glitch in the software that switched your vote and you didn"t know it. Better luck next time. And with the way this administration stands up for the corporation, the less said in the press about this sort of "minor" problem the better.
Protect Your Vote: Get A Receipt!
In the last election, we knew the election was stolen; in this election, we may not even know that much.
By John Greeley
Your vote. My vote. Reduced to electronic zeros and ones, a whisper on the wind. Was your vote tabulated? Did it actually get counted? The answer is, "Who knows?" Check the disk. OOPS. If you thought hanging chads were a pain to get counted, what do you do with electronic bits? The possibility for fraud in the absence of a paper trail is simply monumental. So if you thought the last presidential election was a mockery, wait till the electronic non-traceable trail starts with this one. A simple keystroke eliminates countless pesky votes. It was only a glitch in the software that switched your vote and you didn"t know it. Better luck next time. And with the way this administration stands up for the corporation, the less said in the press about this sort of "minor" problem the better.
Protect Your Vote: Get A Receipt!
17 December 2003
Critics: Convicted felons worked for electronic voting companies
RACHEL KONRAD
Associated Press
Dec. 17, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO - A manufacturer of electronic voting machines has employed at least five convicted felons as managers, according to critics demanding more stringent background checks for people responsible for voting machine software.
Voter advocate Bev Harris alleged Tuesday that managers of a subsidiary of Diebold Inc., one of the country's largest voting equipment vendors, included a cocaine trafficker, a man who conducted fraudulent stock transactions, and a programmer jailed for falsifying computer records.
The programmer, Jeffrey Dean, wrote and maintained proprietary code used to count hundreds of thousands of votes as senior vice president of Global Election Systems Inc. Diebold purchased GES in January 2002.
According to a public court document released before GES hired him, Dean served time in a Washington correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files in a scheme that "involved a high degree of sophistication and planning."
--snip
Harris and Andy Stephenson, a Democratic candidate for secretary of state in Washington, conducted a 10-day investigation in Seattle and Vancouver, where the men were convicted. Harris and Stephenson released the findings in a 17-page document online and at a news conference in Seattle.
Also Tuesday, Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed announced legislation that would require electronic voting machines in Washington to produce a paper trail. If the legislature approves it, touch-screen machines in the state would be required to produce paper receipts by 2006. Voters would get to see but not touch or remove the receipts, which would be kept in a county lock box.
Computer programmers say software bugs, hackers or electrical outages could cause more than 50,000 touch-screen machines used in precincts nationwide to delete or alter votes. California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley announced Nov. 21 that touch-screens in the nation's most populous state must provide paper receipts by 2006.
ON THE NET - blackboxvoting.com
Read Article
RACHEL KONRAD
Associated Press
Dec. 17, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO - A manufacturer of electronic voting machines has employed at least five convicted felons as managers, according to critics demanding more stringent background checks for people responsible for voting machine software.
Voter advocate Bev Harris alleged Tuesday that managers of a subsidiary of Diebold Inc., one of the country's largest voting equipment vendors, included a cocaine trafficker, a man who conducted fraudulent stock transactions, and a programmer jailed for falsifying computer records.
The programmer, Jeffrey Dean, wrote and maintained proprietary code used to count hundreds of thousands of votes as senior vice president of Global Election Systems Inc. Diebold purchased GES in January 2002.
According to a public court document released before GES hired him, Dean served time in a Washington correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files in a scheme that "involved a high degree of sophistication and planning."
--snip
Harris and Andy Stephenson, a Democratic candidate for secretary of state in Washington, conducted a 10-day investigation in Seattle and Vancouver, where the men were convicted. Harris and Stephenson released the findings in a 17-page document online and at a news conference in Seattle.
Also Tuesday, Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed announced legislation that would require electronic voting machines in Washington to produce a paper trail. If the legislature approves it, touch-screen machines in the state would be required to produce paper receipts by 2006. Voters would get to see but not touch or remove the receipts, which would be kept in a county lock box.
Computer programmers say software bugs, hackers or electrical outages could cause more than 50,000 touch-screen machines used in precincts nationwide to delete or alter votes. California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley announced Nov. 21 that touch-screens in the nation's most populous state must provide paper receipts by 2006.
ON THE NET - blackboxvoting.com
Read Article
Group Seeks E-Voting Standards
By Kim Zetter
Dec. 16, 2003
GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, the keepers of the atomic clock and the official arbiters of time in the United States, will attempt to restore trust and confidence in voting systems.
That was the institute's announcement last week when it convened a conference in Gaithersburg, Maryland, to gather input from election officials, secretaries of state, voting-machine makers, computer security professionals and voting activists about how to address voters' lagging confidence in election systems -- particularly in electronic voting systems.
Read Article
By Kim Zetter
Dec. 16, 2003
GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, the keepers of the atomic clock and the official arbiters of time in the United States, will attempt to restore trust and confidence in voting systems.
That was the institute's announcement last week when it convened a conference in Gaithersburg, Maryland, to gather input from election officials, secretaries of state, voting-machine makers, computer security professionals and voting activists about how to address voters' lagging confidence in election systems -- particularly in electronic voting systems.
Read Article
15 December 2003
Electronic Voting Investigator Bev Harris to Reveal Newly Discovered Potential Electronic Voting Security Breaches at Seattle News Conference On December 16th
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
Monday December 15, 2003
Bev Harris, author of "Black Box Voting" and Andy Stephenson, a Democratic candidate for Washington State Secretary of State, have uncovered new holes in the electoral system in King County (Seattle) and in as many as 14 additional states.
These security breaches affect both the optical scan systems (fill-in-the-dot or draw-the-line) and touch screen voting systems, and may also indicate significant security problems with absentee voting procedures.
At the Tuesday press conference, Harris and Stephenson will distribute a packet of documents to support their findings. Whereas electronic voting concerns have focused on complex issues like cryptographic security and computer source code, the new security flaws uncovered by Harris and Stephenson are more serious and also easier to explain. Because the subject matter is sensitive, reporters will want copies of the original documents to substantiate the findings, and these will be released at the news conference.
This information affects four counties in Washington State and locations in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, Maryland and Virginia.
"What we have are two intertwined security breaches which deserve immediate attention from the U.S. Congress," says Stephenson. "We need to address procedural safeguards as soon as possible to put a halt to these problems and prevent them from ever happening again."
A 20-page dossier will provide the specific U.S. locations affected, as well as the details on multiple security breaches which may have compromised the integrity of at least two dozen elections.
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
BuzzFlash Report
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
Monday December 15, 2003
Bev Harris, author of "Black Box Voting" and Andy Stephenson, a Democratic candidate for Washington State Secretary of State, have uncovered new holes in the electoral system in King County (Seattle) and in as many as 14 additional states.
These security breaches affect both the optical scan systems (fill-in-the-dot or draw-the-line) and touch screen voting systems, and may also indicate significant security problems with absentee voting procedures.
At the Tuesday press conference, Harris and Stephenson will distribute a packet of documents to support their findings. Whereas electronic voting concerns have focused on complex issues like cryptographic security and computer source code, the new security flaws uncovered by Harris and Stephenson are more serious and also easier to explain. Because the subject matter is sensitive, reporters will want copies of the original documents to substantiate the findings, and these will be released at the news conference.
This information affects four counties in Washington State and locations in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, Maryland and Virginia.
"What we have are two intertwined security breaches which deserve immediate attention from the U.S. Congress," says Stephenson. "We need to address procedural safeguards as soon as possible to put a halt to these problems and prevent them from ever happening again."
A 20-page dossier will provide the specific U.S. locations affected, as well as the details on multiple security breaches which may have compromised the integrity of at least two dozen elections.
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
BuzzFlash Report
12 December 2003
Bill would require paper receipts for electronic voting terminals
By RACHEL KONRAD, Associated Press Writer
December 12, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer said Thursday she would introduce a bill requiring electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts by November 2004.
The announcement was a major victory for voting rights advocates and computer scientists, who have been arguing for more than a year that paperless voting terminals exposed elections to hackers, software bugs and mechanical failures.
But voting equipment companies and county registrars sharply criticized the measure, saying printers would dramatically increase the cost and complexity of voting.
Boxer and New Jersey Democratic Rep. Rush Holt plan to introduce the bill early next year. The bill would require electronic voting companies to meet tougher security standards, including surprise audits and background checks for software engineers.
"I'm not a paranoid person by nature in any way, but we need to make sure there's confidence built into the system," Boxer said Thursday in a phone interview. "Verification of a voter system - I can think of nothing more important than that to be sure that every vote counts."
The bill would provide emergency funding for counties that must upgrade hardware and software to accommodate printers, which cost at least $500 per machine. The receipts would be stored in a county lock box for use in a recount.
Read the rest of the story!
Senator Barbara Boxer ... you are the best! THANK YOU for taking up this MOST important cause. YOU TOO are a true PATRIOT! Congressman Rush Holt has been working on this for a long time, and without his efforts to give this issue visibility and credibility, it might have been swept aside as some loony, leftwing paranoia. This is, indeed, a major victory for voting rights advocates, and for ALL citizens who deserve to have their votes count.
By RACHEL KONRAD, Associated Press Writer
December 12, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer said Thursday she would introduce a bill requiring electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts by November 2004.
The announcement was a major victory for voting rights advocates and computer scientists, who have been arguing for more than a year that paperless voting terminals exposed elections to hackers, software bugs and mechanical failures.
But voting equipment companies and county registrars sharply criticized the measure, saying printers would dramatically increase the cost and complexity of voting.
Boxer and New Jersey Democratic Rep. Rush Holt plan to introduce the bill early next year. The bill would require electronic voting companies to meet tougher security standards, including surprise audits and background checks for software engineers.
"I'm not a paranoid person by nature in any way, but we need to make sure there's confidence built into the system," Boxer said Thursday in a phone interview. "Verification of a voter system - I can think of nothing more important than that to be sure that every vote counts."
The bill would provide emergency funding for counties that must upgrade hardware and software to accommodate printers, which cost at least $500 per machine. The receipts would be stored in a county lock box for use in a recount.
Read the rest of the story!
Senator Barbara Boxer ... you are the best! THANK YOU for taking up this MOST important cause. YOU TOO are a true PATRIOT! Congressman Rush Holt has been working on this for a long time, and without his efforts to give this issue visibility and credibility, it might have been swept aside as some loony, leftwing paranoia. This is, indeed, a major victory for voting rights advocates, and for ALL citizens who deserve to have their votes count.
Nevada decides on new voting machines
Dec. 11, 2003 | Secretary of State Dean Heller said Wednesday that Nevada has become the first state to demand a voter-verifiable receipt printer on new touch-screen voting machines being purchased for the 2004 elections.
Heller picked Oakland, Calif.-based Sequoia Voting Systems over Diebold Election Systems of North Canton, Ohio, as the supplier of the new direct-recording electronic voting machines that will be bought with federal funds.
Heller also decertified all punch-card voting machines in Nevada as of next Sept. 1, just before the state's primary, saying it's his duty "to provide voters with the highest level of confidence that elections in this state are fair, unbiased and secure."
"A paper trail is an intrinsic component of voter confidence," Heller said in explaining why he insisted that Sequoia -- which already has nearly 3,000 machines installed in Clark County -- include the receipt printers on new machines for the upcoming elections. The printers must be added on existing machines by 2006.
--snip
The decision to go with Sequoia machines was based in part on a review by the state Gaming Control Board's slot machine experts who issued a report saying the Diebold machine that was analyzed "represented a legitimate threat to the integrity of the election process."
Read Article
Wow ... Mr. Heller, you are MY HERO!! : ) Now if you could just get the rest of the dummies around the country to do the same! People, THAT is a true patriot ... one who believes in democracy and the people's right to a fair and honest vote!
Dec. 11, 2003 | Secretary of State Dean Heller said Wednesday that Nevada has become the first state to demand a voter-verifiable receipt printer on new touch-screen voting machines being purchased for the 2004 elections.
Heller picked Oakland, Calif.-based Sequoia Voting Systems over Diebold Election Systems of North Canton, Ohio, as the supplier of the new direct-recording electronic voting machines that will be bought with federal funds.
Heller also decertified all punch-card voting machines in Nevada as of next Sept. 1, just before the state's primary, saying it's his duty "to provide voters with the highest level of confidence that elections in this state are fair, unbiased and secure."
"A paper trail is an intrinsic component of voter confidence," Heller said in explaining why he insisted that Sequoia -- which already has nearly 3,000 machines installed in Clark County -- include the receipt printers on new machines for the upcoming elections. The printers must be added on existing machines by 2006.
--snip
The decision to go with Sequoia machines was based in part on a review by the state Gaming Control Board's slot machine experts who issued a report saying the Diebold machine that was analyzed "represented a legitimate threat to the integrity of the election process."
Read Article
Wow ... Mr. Heller, you are MY HERO!! : ) Now if you could just get the rest of the dummies around the country to do the same! People, THAT is a true patriot ... one who believes in democracy and the people's right to a fair and honest vote!
Welcome to Operation Enduring Vote
Click on the link below to open and/or download the introductory pdf file. This file may be reprinted and distributed freely with the permission of the author.
Operation Enduring Vote
You will need a free copy of Adobe's Acrobat Reader to view or print the pdf file.
Adobe Reader
Operation Enduring Vote Website
Click on the link below to open and/or download the introductory pdf file. This file may be reprinted and distributed freely with the permission of the author.
Operation Enduring Vote
You will need a free copy of Adobe's Acrobat Reader to view or print the pdf file.
Adobe Reader
Operation Enduring Vote Website
Electronic voting no magic bullet
Specialists seek input of academia, technology, election officials
By Marsha Walton
CNN
Thursday, December 11, 2003
GAITHERSBURG, Maryland (CNN) -- After the debacle of the dimpled ballots and "hanging chads" of the 2000 presidential race, many election officials looked to technology to come to their rescue.
They rushed to buy new, high-tech electronic voting equipment, expecting features such as touch screens to prove more reliable than older systems' punch cards.
But at a sometimes boisterous meeting of election officials, computer scientists and voting machine vendors this week in the Washington suburb of Gaithersburg, it seems clear that technology will not solve all.
Several well-publicized flaws in "e-voting," or electronic voting, systems have not led to improvements, said Harvard University computer professor Rebecca Mercuri.
"When such problems are exposed, no one appears to be held accountable," Mercuri said.
"Officials are not removed from their posts, fired or sent to trial; vendors are not banned from participation; equipment is not recalled; standards are not rewritten; and elections are not re-held," she said.
Read Article
Specialists seek input of academia, technology, election officials
By Marsha Walton
CNN
Thursday, December 11, 2003
GAITHERSBURG, Maryland (CNN) -- After the debacle of the dimpled ballots and "hanging chads" of the 2000 presidential race, many election officials looked to technology to come to their rescue.
They rushed to buy new, high-tech electronic voting equipment, expecting features such as touch screens to prove more reliable than older systems' punch cards.
But at a sometimes boisterous meeting of election officials, computer scientists and voting machine vendors this week in the Washington suburb of Gaithersburg, it seems clear that technology will not solve all.
Several well-publicized flaws in "e-voting," or electronic voting, systems have not led to improvements, said Harvard University computer professor Rebecca Mercuri.
"When such problems are exposed, no one appears to be held accountable," Mercuri said.
"Officials are not removed from their posts, fired or sent to trial; vendors are not banned from participation; equipment is not recalled; standards are not rewritten; and elections are not re-held," she said.
Read Article
11 December 2003
E-voting: Yes or no?
High-tech methods examined at national conference
By Daniel Sieberg
CNN Headline News
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
(CNN) -- The U.S. presidential election is less than a year away, but some tech experts have lingering and deep-rooted concerns about the way electronic voting is being handled.
In 2000, several counties used high-tech machines for the first time, such as touch screens, though most places still relied on punch card or paper ballots. During the 2002 election, an increasing number of counties deployed the automated machines, partly in response to the hanging chad debacle in Florida. For example, the entire state of Georgia used machines from a company called Diebold.
Politicians hoped the new devices would save money, make the process more efficient and accurate, and alleviate any discrepancies.
To a certain degree, that happened. But other problems have arisen and the controversy has been re-ignited in the past few months.
E-voting: Yes or no?
High-tech methods examined at national conference
By Daniel Sieberg
CNN Headline News
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
(CNN) -- The U.S. presidential election is less than a year away, but some tech experts have lingering and deep-rooted concerns about the way electronic voting is being handled.
In 2000, several counties used high-tech machines for the first time, such as touch screens, though most places still relied on punch card or paper ballots. During the 2002 election, an increasing number of counties deployed the automated machines, partly in response to the hanging chad debacle in Florida. For example, the entire state of Georgia used machines from a company called Diebold.
Politicians hoped the new devices would save money, make the process more efficient and accurate, and alleviate any discrepancies.
To a certain degree, that happened. But other problems have arisen and the controversy has been re-ignited in the past few months.
E-voting: Yes or no?
Diebold e-mail discusses price gouging Maryland
by Steven T. Dennis
Staff Writer
Dec. 11, 2003
ANNAPOLIS -- An e-mail found in a collection of files stolen from Diebold Elections Systems' internal database recommends charging Maryland "out the yin-yang," if the state requires Diebold to add paper printouts to the $73 million voting system it purchased.
The e-mail from "Ken," dated Jan. 3, 2003, discusses a (Baltimore) Sun article about a University of Maryland study of the Diebold system:
"There is an important point that seems to be missed by all these articles: they already bought the system. At this point they are just closing the barn door. Let's just hope that as a company we are smart enough to charge out the yin if they try to change the rules now and legislate voter receipts."
"Ken" later clarifies that he meant "out the yin-yang," adding, "any after-sale changes should be prohibitively expensive."
Diebold e-mail discusses price gouging Maryland
by Steven T. Dennis
Staff Writer
Dec. 11, 2003
ANNAPOLIS -- An e-mail found in a collection of files stolen from Diebold Elections Systems' internal database recommends charging Maryland "out the yin-yang," if the state requires Diebold to add paper printouts to the $73 million voting system it purchased.
The e-mail from "Ken," dated Jan. 3, 2003, discusses a (Baltimore) Sun article about a University of Maryland study of the Diebold system:
"There is an important point that seems to be missed by all these articles: they already bought the system. At this point they are just closing the barn door. Let's just hope that as a company we are smart enough to charge out the yin if they try to change the rules now and legislate voter receipts."
"Ken" later clarifies that he meant "out the yin-yang," adding, "any after-sale changes should be prohibitively expensive."
Diebold e-mail discusses price gouging Maryland
10 December 2003
No Confidence Vote:
Why the Current Touch Screen Voting Fiasco Was Pretty Much Inevitable
By Robert X. Cringely
December 4, 2003
If you spend any time on the Internet in the U.S., it is almost impossible not to know about the scandal involving touch screen voting machines. I mentioned it a few months ago, and my goal at that time was to goad the big newspapers into looking at the story, with the idea that if there was any truth to it, the New York Times and Washington Post ought to be on the story. Well, now they are, especially the Times, which this week ran an op-ed piece by Paul Krugman that ought to make a lot of politicians very uncomfortable. Depending on whom you read, either computerized voting is being used to help American voters or to hurt them. The American Civil Liberties Union said in California that certain counties in the recent recall election were disenfranchised by not having touch screen voting, while other organizations suggest that touch screens were used to steal elections in Georgia. I don't know about any of this, but I do know about Information Technology, so I suggest we look at this issue in a way that nobody else seems to be -- as an IT problem.
--snip
Now here's the really interesting part. Forgetting for a moment Diebold's voting machines, let's look at the other equipment they make. Diebold makes a lot of ATM machines. They make machines that sell tickets for trains and subways. They make store checkout scanners, including self-service scanners. They make machines that allow access to buildings for people with magnetic cards. They make machines that use magnetic cards for payment in closed systems like university dining rooms. All of these are machines that involve data input that results in a transaction, just like a voting machine. But unlike a voting machine, every one of these other kinds of Diebold machines -- EVERY ONE -- creates a paper trail and can be audited. Would Citibank have it any other way? Would Home Depot? Would the CIA? Of course not. These machines affect the livelihood of their owners. If they can't be audited they can't be trusted. If they can't be trusted they won't be used.
Now back to those voting machines. If EVERY OTHER kind of machine you make includes an auditable paper trail, wouldn't it seem logical to include such a capability in the voting machines, too? Given that what you are doing is adapting existing technology to a new purpose, wouldn't it be logical to carry over to voting machines this capability that is so important in every other kind of transaction device?
This confuses me. I'd love to know who said to leave the feature out and why?
Next week: the answer.
Read the rest of the story
Why the Current Touch Screen Voting Fiasco Was Pretty Much Inevitable
By Robert X. Cringely
December 4, 2003
If you spend any time on the Internet in the U.S., it is almost impossible not to know about the scandal involving touch screen voting machines. I mentioned it a few months ago, and my goal at that time was to goad the big newspapers into looking at the story, with the idea that if there was any truth to it, the New York Times and Washington Post ought to be on the story. Well, now they are, especially the Times, which this week ran an op-ed piece by Paul Krugman that ought to make a lot of politicians very uncomfortable. Depending on whom you read, either computerized voting is being used to help American voters or to hurt them. The American Civil Liberties Union said in California that certain counties in the recent recall election were disenfranchised by not having touch screen voting, while other organizations suggest that touch screens were used to steal elections in Georgia. I don't know about any of this, but I do know about Information Technology, so I suggest we look at this issue in a way that nobody else seems to be -- as an IT problem.
--snip
Now here's the really interesting part. Forgetting for a moment Diebold's voting machines, let's look at the other equipment they make. Diebold makes a lot of ATM machines. They make machines that sell tickets for trains and subways. They make store checkout scanners, including self-service scanners. They make machines that allow access to buildings for people with magnetic cards. They make machines that use magnetic cards for payment in closed systems like university dining rooms. All of these are machines that involve data input that results in a transaction, just like a voting machine. But unlike a voting machine, every one of these other kinds of Diebold machines -- EVERY ONE -- creates a paper trail and can be audited. Would Citibank have it any other way? Would Home Depot? Would the CIA? Of course not. These machines affect the livelihood of their owners. If they can't be audited they can't be trusted. If they can't be trusted they won't be used.
Now back to those voting machines. If EVERY OTHER kind of machine you make includes an auditable paper trail, wouldn't it seem logical to include such a capability in the voting machines, too? Given that what you are doing is adapting existing technology to a new purpose, wouldn't it be logical to carry over to voting machines this capability that is so important in every other kind of transaction device?
This confuses me. I'd love to know who said to leave the feature out and why?
Next week: the answer.
Read the rest of the story
Voting-Machine Makers To Fight Security Criticism
By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 9, 2003
Electronic-voting-machine companies announced yesterday that they are banding together to counter mounting concerns about whether their machines are secure enough to withstand tampering by hackers.
Read Article
By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 9, 2003
Electronic-voting-machine companies announced yesterday that they are banding together to counter mounting concerns about whether their machines are secure enough to withstand tampering by hackers.
Read Article
Bob Graham Introduces Senate Legislation To Require Paper Record Of Votes
Senator Graham's Press Release is here
A PDF of the bill is here
===========================
For information call: 202-224-3041
Graham Introduces Legislation To Ensure America's Votes Count
December 9, 2003
Senator Bob Graham, D-Florida, today introduced the Voter Verification Act, legislation that would require computer voting systems to produce a paper record.
"After the election of 2000 and the mid-term election - where stories of voter problems were not uncommon - we have to put an electoral system into place in which Americans can have full confidence," said Graham. "This legislation will take us one step further to ensure that every vote really counts and we do not have another debacle like the 2000 election."
Read Article
Senator Graham's Press Release is here
A PDF of the bill is here
===========================
For information call: 202-224-3041
Graham Introduces Legislation To Ensure America's Votes Count
December 9, 2003
Senator Bob Graham, D-Florida, today introduced the Voter Verification Act, legislation that would require computer voting systems to produce a paper record.
"After the election of 2000 and the mid-term election - where stories of voter problems were not uncommon - we have to put an electoral system into place in which Americans can have full confidence," said Graham. "This legislation will take us one step further to ensure that every vote really counts and we do not have another debacle like the 2000 election."
Read Article
Verified Voting - Campaign To Demand Verifiable Election Results
Will Your Vote Count in the Next Election? Maybe not! How will we even know?
A growing concern over the inadequacies of election equipment in the United States has recently been heightened by the problems of the 2000 Presidential election. Added to the mix is the election reform mandated by recent federal legislation attempting to address the concerns. The result is that many states are scurrying to replace their older equipment with new electronic voting computers.
Unfortunately, election technology has not advanced to the point where it can provide us with electronic systems that are reliable enough to trust with our democracy. In other words, we just aren’t there yet.
ACTION ALERTS!
National: Join Martin Luther King III, ActForChange and over 38,000 voters to support the need for paper trail. All US voters please sign this National petition now.
National: Support Legislation HR 2239 requiring Voter-Verified Paper Trail for 2004 Elections All US voters please sign this National petition as well.
National: Help research where your Congressperson stands on HR 2239
Verified Voting - Campaign To Demand Verifiable Election Results
Will Your Vote Count in the Next Election? Maybe not! How will we even know?
A growing concern over the inadequacies of election equipment in the United States has recently been heightened by the problems of the 2000 Presidential election. Added to the mix is the election reform mandated by recent federal legislation attempting to address the concerns. The result is that many states are scurrying to replace their older equipment with new electronic voting computers.
Unfortunately, election technology has not advanced to the point where it can provide us with electronic systems that are reliable enough to trust with our democracy. In other words, we just aren’t there yet.
ACTION ALERTS!
National: Join Martin Luther King III, ActForChange and over 38,000 voters to support the need for paper trail. All US voters please sign this National petition now.
National: Support Legislation HR 2239 requiring Voter-Verified Paper Trail for 2004 Elections All US voters please sign this National petition as well.
National: Help research where your Congressperson stands on HR 2239
Verified Voting - Campaign To Demand Verifiable Election Results
A Paper Trail for Voters
December 8, 2003
New York Times Editorial
Ever since the voting trauma in Florida three years ago, election officials have been trying to find a better way to cast and count ballots. As progress is beginning to be made, it is critical that the new strategies do not create as many problems as they solve.
With the help of $3.9 billion in federal funds set aside to improve elections, states have begun the move to electronic voting machines. The new A.T.M.-style machines are easier for most people to use and undeniably faster. But recent glitches in Virginia and Florida have revived questions about how to recount a computerized vote after a close or suspicious election. New machines can already print a total of all votes cast, but that is simply a reflection of the computerized tally. What is needed is a paper record of each voter's choices that the voter can verify.
The most reasonable answer is to require that the machines be equipped with printers that will produce what Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, calls a "parallel paper record" of the vote. That makes sense to us. Like deeds, diplomas and other vital public documents, the nation's votes still need to be preserved somewhere on paper.
This view has drawn a lot of criticism, particularly from companies that make electronic voting machines. They say that adding a paper trail will cost more and that the printers will complicate the maintenance of the machines. Mainly, however, the machines' supporters say no fail-safe system is necessary because the machines are extremely secure.
--snip
Too many elections teeter on a few hundred votes, and candidates rightly expect human beings to be able to double-check the results. America's election apparatus needs to move firmly and quickly into the computer age. But the public must feel secure that each vote is really counted. At this stage, a voter-verified paper trail offers the public that necessary security.
A Paper Trail for Voters
December 8, 2003
New York Times Editorial
Ever since the voting trauma in Florida three years ago, election officials have been trying to find a better way to cast and count ballots. As progress is beginning to be made, it is critical that the new strategies do not create as many problems as they solve.
With the help of $3.9 billion in federal funds set aside to improve elections, states have begun the move to electronic voting machines. The new A.T.M.-style machines are easier for most people to use and undeniably faster. But recent glitches in Virginia and Florida have revived questions about how to recount a computerized vote after a close or suspicious election. New machines can already print a total of all votes cast, but that is simply a reflection of the computerized tally. What is needed is a paper record of each voter's choices that the voter can verify.
The most reasonable answer is to require that the machines be equipped with printers that will produce what Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, calls a "parallel paper record" of the vote. That makes sense to us. Like deeds, diplomas and other vital public documents, the nation's votes still need to be preserved somewhere on paper.
This view has drawn a lot of criticism, particularly from companies that make electronic voting machines. They say that adding a paper trail will cost more and that the printers will complicate the maintenance of the machines. Mainly, however, the machines' supporters say no fail-safe system is necessary because the machines are extremely secure.
--snip
Too many elections teeter on a few hundred votes, and candidates rightly expect human beings to be able to double-check the results. America's election apparatus needs to move firmly and quickly into the computer age. But the public must feel secure that each vote is really counted. At this stage, a voter-verified paper trail offers the public that necessary security.
A Paper Trail for Voters
04 December 2003
Hack the Vote
By Paul Krugman
The New York Times
02 December 2003
Inviting Bush supporters to a fund-raiser, the host wrote, "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." No surprise there. But Walden O'Dell — who says that he wasn't talking about his business operations — happens to be the chief executive of Diebold Inc., whose touch-screen voting machines are in increasingly widespread use across the United States.
For example, Georgia — where Republicans scored spectacular upset victories in the 2002 midterm elections — relies exclusively on Diebold machines. To be clear, though there were many anomalies in that 2002 vote, there is no evidence that the machines miscounted. But there is also no evidence that the machines counted correctly. You see, Diebold machines leave no paper trail.
--snip
The point is that you don't have to believe in a central conspiracy to worry that partisans will take advantage of an insecure, unverifiable voting system to manipulate election results. Why expose them to temptation?
I'll discuss what to do in a future column. But let's be clear: the credibility of U.S. democracy may be at stake.
Read Article
By Paul Krugman
The New York Times
02 December 2003
Inviting Bush supporters to a fund-raiser, the host wrote, "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." No surprise there. But Walden O'Dell — who says that he wasn't talking about his business operations — happens to be the chief executive of Diebold Inc., whose touch-screen voting machines are in increasingly widespread use across the United States.
For example, Georgia — where Republicans scored spectacular upset victories in the 2002 midterm elections — relies exclusively on Diebold machines. To be clear, though there were many anomalies in that 2002 vote, there is no evidence that the machines miscounted. But there is also no evidence that the machines counted correctly. You see, Diebold machines leave no paper trail.
--snip
The point is that you don't have to believe in a central conspiracy to worry that partisans will take advantage of an insecure, unverifiable voting system to manipulate election results. Why expose them to temptation?
I'll discuss what to do in a future column. But let's be clear: the credibility of U.S. democracy may be at stake.
Read Article
Bev Harris on the Perils to Democracy by Electronic Voting
A BUZZFLASH INTERVIEW
December 4, 2003
BUZZFLASH: Explain the implications of Diebold withdrawing its lawsuit and how this impacts you?
BEV HARRIS: First, the impact of Diebold's abusive use of copyright law did very serious damage to my organization and me. This triggered a shutdown of BlackBoxVoting.org, which lasted 30 days and derailed activism to monitor the California Recall Election, stripping away our activism base as it muted my voice on the issue. It nearly decapitated blackboxvoting.org.
Diebold's withdrawal from the lawsuit was good; now Diebold should consider withdrawing from the elections industry. Even in baseball, you only get three strikes. At what point do we say to this company, "Sorry, I just can't trust you anymore."
Read Article
A BUZZFLASH INTERVIEW
December 4, 2003
BUZZFLASH: Explain the implications of Diebold withdrawing its lawsuit and how this impacts you?
BEV HARRIS: First, the impact of Diebold's abusive use of copyright law did very serious damage to my organization and me. This triggered a shutdown of BlackBoxVoting.org, which lasted 30 days and derailed activism to monitor the California Recall Election, stripping away our activism base as it muted my voice on the issue. It nearly decapitated blackboxvoting.org.
Diebold's withdrawal from the lawsuit was good; now Diebold should consider withdrawing from the elections industry. Even in baseball, you only get three strikes. At what point do we say to this company, "Sorry, I just can't trust you anymore."
Read Article
Statewide electronic voting delayed
Julie Carr Smyth
Plain Dealer Bureau
12/03/03
Columbus - Ohio's sweeping review of electronic voting machines turned up so many potential security flaws in the systems that the state's top elections official has called off deploying them in March.
The detailed findings confirmed what academics, computer scientists and voter advocates across the country have said for months: Electronic voting systems are prime targets for manipulation by anyone from expert computer hackers to poll workers to individual voters.
Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who ordered the review, said he and machine vendors are confident that all 57 problems identified by investigators can be fixed.
He said his decision to detail each security flaw in a public report, and then to assure each one is addressed, will provide vendors with a "Good Seal of Security Approval" and build confidence in electronic voting technology both in the state of Ohio and around the United States
Statewide electronic voting delayed
Julie Carr Smyth
Plain Dealer Bureau
12/03/03
Columbus - Ohio's sweeping review of electronic voting machines turned up so many potential security flaws in the systems that the state's top elections official has called off deploying them in March.
The detailed findings confirmed what academics, computer scientists and voter advocates across the country have said for months: Electronic voting systems are prime targets for manipulation by anyone from expert computer hackers to poll workers to individual voters.
Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who ordered the review, said he and machine vendors are confident that all 57 problems identified by investigators can be fixed.
He said his decision to detail each security flaw in a public report, and then to assure each one is addressed, will provide vendors with a "Good Seal of Security Approval" and build confidence in electronic voting technology both in the state of Ohio and around the United States
Statewide electronic voting delayed
Diebold retreats; lawmaker demands inquiry
By Paul Festa
CNET News.com
December 1, 2003
Diebold is facing threats on two fronts as free-speech advocates pursue monetary damages against it and a presidential candidate urges a congressional inquiry into the company.
Diebold, which makes touch-screen voting machines in use around the world, on Monday reiterated its withdrawal of copyright takedown notices directed at numerous Internet service providers with subscribers who posted copies of its internal e-mail correspondence--and in some cases links to those copies.
--snip
Diebold's retreat in the courtroom comes as U.S. congressional representative Dennis Kucinich, who is seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, jumped onto the anti-Diebold bandwagon by providing links to the Diebold e-mail correspondence from his House of Representatives Web site.
The Web site, launched Nov. 20, criticizes Diebold for both its product and its conduct in pursuing the Swarthmore students.
"Diebold has been using coercive legal claims to intimidate Internet service providers and even universities to shut down Web sites with links to its memos and remove the memo content," the site reads. "By abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Diebold has intimidated numerous Internet service providers to comply with its requests...Congressman Kucinich is working to address these problems by providing some of Diebold's internal memos on this site to increase public access..."
Kucinich also asked the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to investigate Diebold's DMCA takedown notices.
"Diebold's actions are representative of a growing body of abuses through which large and powerful parties unfairly intimidate ISPs to remove information those parties do not like," Kucinich wrote in a letter dated Nov. 21. "Powerful parties should not be permitted to misuse copyright as a tool for limiting bad press and barring access to legitimate consumer information."
The court hearing the students' and ISP's case against Diebold sent the case for mediation, scheduled hearings for motions in January, and scheduled a final hearing for Feb. 9.
Read Article
By Paul Festa
CNET News.com
December 1, 2003
Diebold is facing threats on two fronts as free-speech advocates pursue monetary damages against it and a presidential candidate urges a congressional inquiry into the company.
Diebold, which makes touch-screen voting machines in use around the world, on Monday reiterated its withdrawal of copyright takedown notices directed at numerous Internet service providers with subscribers who posted copies of its internal e-mail correspondence--and in some cases links to those copies.
--snip
Diebold's retreat in the courtroom comes as U.S. congressional representative Dennis Kucinich, who is seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, jumped onto the anti-Diebold bandwagon by providing links to the Diebold e-mail correspondence from his House of Representatives Web site.
The Web site, launched Nov. 20, criticizes Diebold for both its product and its conduct in pursuing the Swarthmore students.
"Diebold has been using coercive legal claims to intimidate Internet service providers and even universities to shut down Web sites with links to its memos and remove the memo content," the site reads. "By abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Diebold has intimidated numerous Internet service providers to comply with its requests...Congressman Kucinich is working to address these problems by providing some of Diebold's internal memos on this site to increase public access..."
Kucinich also asked the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to investigate Diebold's DMCA takedown notices.
"Diebold's actions are representative of a growing body of abuses through which large and powerful parties unfairly intimidate ISPs to remove information those parties do not like," Kucinich wrote in a letter dated Nov. 21. "Powerful parties should not be permitted to misuse copyright as a tool for limiting bad press and barring access to legitimate consumer information."
The court hearing the students' and ISP's case against Diebold sent the case for mediation, scheduled hearings for motions in January, and scheduled a final hearing for Feb. 9.
Read Article
Security Assurances from Electronic Voting Machine Vendors
Tuesday, December 2, 2003
COLUMBUS – Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell today ordered electronic voting device vendors to resolve security weaknesses uncovered in two comprehensive examinations. Also, in the most extensive release of electronic voting device security information to date, Secretary Blackwell released the full findings of each examination.
“Today’s release of information provides voters with a check list of problems found and a road map for corrections,” Blackwell said. “In order to maintain strong public confidence in our elections systems, voters must be assured that the security risks uncovered in our reviews have been addressed and resolved,” Blackwell said.
Secretary Blackwell will seek an extension of federally mandated Help America Vote Act (HAVA) deadlines in order to provide system manufacturers time to correct deficiencies.
“I will not place these voting devices before Ohio’s voters until identified risks are corrected and system security is bolstered,” Blackwell said. “Fortunately, all of the documented risks will be expeditiously corrected by each of our voting machine manufacturers. When Ohioans begin casting ballots on these electronic devices they will do so with the knowledge that the integrity of their voting system has been maintained.”
Read Article
Well, now how do you like them apples? Is that a miracle, or am I seeing things?
Tuesday, December 2, 2003
COLUMBUS – Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell today ordered electronic voting device vendors to resolve security weaknesses uncovered in two comprehensive examinations. Also, in the most extensive release of electronic voting device security information to date, Secretary Blackwell released the full findings of each examination.
“Today’s release of information provides voters with a check list of problems found and a road map for corrections,” Blackwell said. “In order to maintain strong public confidence in our elections systems, voters must be assured that the security risks uncovered in our reviews have been addressed and resolved,” Blackwell said.
Secretary Blackwell will seek an extension of federally mandated Help America Vote Act (HAVA) deadlines in order to provide system manufacturers time to correct deficiencies.
“I will not place these voting devices before Ohio’s voters until identified risks are corrected and system security is bolstered,” Blackwell said. “Fortunately, all of the documented risks will be expeditiously corrected by each of our voting machine manufacturers. When Ohioans begin casting ballots on these electronic devices they will do so with the knowledge that the integrity of their voting system has been maintained.”
Read Article
Well, now how do you like them apples? Is that a miracle, or am I seeing things?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)