Internet Ad Seeks Temp Workers to Privately Shuttle Hackable Voting Machines for California's Upcoming Primary Elections

Bradblog - 5/23/06

So much for those vaunted claims by California's Sec. of State Bruce McPherson and his partners at Diebold, Inc. about increased security surrounding the physical access to electronic voting machines in light of newly revealed vulnerabilities to easy tampering.

A tip received by The BRAD BLOG on Monday reveals that Temp Workers are currently being sought in San Francisco for California's upcoming primary election to "assist in dropping off election voting machines and picking these machines up when voting is complete," as the says.

A classified ad seeking the workers is currently posted on the Internet at Monster.com by Kelly Services. (A screenshot of the complete ad is posted at the end of this article.) The salary offered to temp workers hired for the job -- who will have private unsupervised access to the state's voting machines before and after election day -- is $11.99/hour according to the posting.


Read More >>

The Money Pit: Diebold vs. America

The Free Press - 15 May 2006

Georgia was the first state in the nation to go 100 percent with electronic voting, thanks to Secretary of State Cathy Cox. This was a mantle she carried, and continues to carry, proudly. In fact, she's using it to bolster her run for governor in 2006, and indeed she is currently the Democratic front-runner.

But when you look at the facts Cathy Cox should be ashamed. She has failed the voters of Georgia. She has ensured that our elections are subject to fraud; she has knowingly allowed software that violates certification standards to be used in elections. She has wasted huge amounts of taxpayer funds on an election system that is proven to be ineffective at best, a downright scam at worst. And she has hidden or lied about these problems, not only to the voters of Georgia, but also to the state legislature.

Read More >>

Will Major Media Stop Hiding Electronic Election Fraud?

The Free Press - 15 May 2006

The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post finally ran coverage of problems with electronic voting machines this week. The scandals surrounding computer fraud and financial illegalities at Diebold and other electronic voting machine companies have become too big and blatant for even the bought, docile, mainstream media to ignore. With 99% of Fox viewers mistakenly believing that the election was "legitimate," only the constant propaganda of Rupert Murdoch's disinformation campaign at Fox stands in the way of a majority of Americans coming to grips with the facts that two consecutive elections have been stolen.

Read More >>

Scientists call Diebold security flaw 'worst ever'

Critics say hole created for upgrades could be exploited by someone with nefarious plans

Ian Hoffman

Computer scientists say a security hole recently found in Diebold Election Systems' touch-screen voting machines is the "worst ever" in a voting system.

Election officials from Iowa to Maryland have been rushing to limit the risk of vote fraud or disabled voting machines since the hole was reported Wednesday.

Scientists, who have conferred with Diebold representatives, said Diebold programmers created the security hole intentionally as a means of quickly upgrading voting software on its electronic voting machines.

The hole allows someone with a common computer component and knowledge of Diebold systems to load almost any software without a password or proof of authenticity and potentially without leaving telltale signs of the change.

"I think it's the most serious thing I've heard to date," said Johns Hopkins University computer science professor Avi Rubin, who published the first security analysis of Diebold voting software in 2003. "Even describing why I think it's serious is dangerous. This is something that's so easy to do that if the public were to hear about it, it would raise the risk of someone doing it. ... This is the worst-case scenario, almost."

Diebold representatives acknowledged the security hole to Pennsylvania elections officials in a May 1 memo but said the "probability for exploiting this vulnerability to install unauthorized software that could affect an election is considered low."

California elections officials echoed that assessment Friday in a message to county elections chiefs.

But several computer scientists said Wednesday that those judgments are founded on the mistaken assumption that taking advantage of the security hole would require access to voting machines for a long time.

"I don't know anyone who considers two minutes lengthy, if it's that," said Michael Shamos, a Carnegie Mellon University computer science professor and veteran voting-systems examiner for the state of Pennsylvania.

"It's the most serious security breach that's ever been discovered in a voting system. On this one, the probability of success is extremely high because there's no residue. ... Any kind of cursory inspection of the machine would not reveal it."

States using Diebold touch screens are "going to have to fix it because they can't have an election without having a fix to this," he said. Otherwise, states risk challenges from losing candidates while being unable to prove easily that the machines worked as designed.

At least two states — Pennsylvania and California — have ordered tighter security and reprogramming of all Diebold touch screens, using software supplied by the state and a method opened by the security hole. Local elections officials then must seal certain openings on the machines with tamper-evident tape.

David Wagner, an assistant professor of computer-science at the University of California, Berkeley and a technical adviser to the California secretary of state's office, said the new measures should minimize risks in the June 6 primary.

Elections officials in Georgia, which uses Diebold touch screens statewide, said existing state rules already are sufficient.

Bev Harris, founder of BlackBoxVoting.org, a nonprofit group critical of electronic voting, said she isn't sure reprogramming and sealing the touch screens will fix the problem.

Voting machines often are delivered to polling places several days before elections, and the outside case of Diebold's touch screens is secured by common Phillips screws. Inside, a hacker can take advantage of the security hole, as well as access other security holes, without disturbing the tamper-evident seals, Harris said.

"Ultimately, there's no way to get rid of the huge security flaws in the design," she said.

Read More >>

New Fears of Security Risks in Electronic Voting Systems

Monica Davey - May 12, 2006

CHICAGO, May 11 — With primary election dates fast approaching in many states, officials in Pennsylvania and California issued urgent directives in recent days about a potential security risk in their Diebold Election Systems touch-screen voting machines, while other states with similar equipment hurried to assess the seriousness of the problem.

"It's the most severe security flaw ever discovered in a voting system," said Michael I. Shamos, a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University who is an examiner of electronic voting systems for Pennsylvania, where the primary is to take place on Tuesday.

Officials from Diebold and from elections' offices in numerous states minimized the significance of the risk and emphasized that there were no signs that any touch-screen machines had been tampered with. But computer scientists said the problem might allow someone to tamper with a machine's software, some saying they preferred not to discuss the flaw at all for fear of offering a roadmap to a hacker.

"This is the barn door being wide open, while people were arguing over the lock on the front door," said Douglas W. Jones, a professor of computer science at the University of Iowa, a state where the primary is June 6.

The latest concern about the touch-screen machines was only the newest chapter in an emerging political and legal fight around the country over voting machines. While some voting officials defend the ease of touch-screens (similar to A.T.M.'s), some advocacy groups argue that optical scan machines, using paper ballots, are far more secure.

The wave of high-tech voting machines was prompted by the 2000 election in Florida, which spotlighted the problems of old-fashioned punch card ballots. But the machines that soon followed have spurred division. Here in Chicago, where voters used both touch-screen and optical-scan systems in a March primary, it took officials a week to tally all the votes because of technical problems and human errors, touching off a flurry of criticism over the Sequoia Voting Systems equipment.

In Maryland this spring, the State House of Delegates passed a bill that would have scrapped touch-screen machines, but the Senate last month took no action on the bill, effectively killing the idea.

This week, Voter Action, a nonprofit group, assisted voters in Arizona in filing for a legal injunction to try to block the state from buying touch-screen electronic voting systems. The suit is among several the group says it has pursued, in states including California, New York and New Mexico.

The new concerns about Diebold's equipment were discovered by Harri Hursti, a Finnish computer expert who was working at the request of Black Box Voting Inc., a nonprofit group that has been critical of electronic voting in the past. The group issued a report on the findings on Thursday.

Computer scientists who have studied the vulnerability say the flaw might allow someone with brief access to a voting machine and with knowledge of computer code to tamper with the machine's software, and even, potentially, to spread malicious code to other parts of the voting system.

As word of Mr. Hursti's findings spread, Diebold issued a warning to recipients of thousands of its machines, saying that it had found a "theoretical security vulnerability" that "could potentially allow unauthorized software to be loaded onto the system."

The company's letter went on: "The probability for exploiting this vulnerability to install unauthorized software that could affect an election is considered low."

David Bear, a spokesman for Diebold Election Systems, said the potential risk existed because the company's technicians had intentionally built the machines in such a way that election officials would be able to update their systems in years ahead.

"For there to be a problem here, you're basically assuming a premise where you have some evil and nefarious election officials who would sneak in and introduce a piece of software," he said. "I don't believe these evil elections people exist."

Still, he said, the company will in the coming months solve the vulnerability, but not before most primary elections occur.

In places where the machines are used, most election officials said they were not worried.

"We're prepared for those types of problems," said Deborah Hench, the registrar of voters in San Joaquin County, Calif. "There are always activists that are anti-electronic voting, and they're constantly trying to put pressure on us to change our system."

Aviel Rubin, a professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins University, did the first in-depth analysis of the security flaws in the source code for Diebold touch-screen machines in 2003. After studying the latest problem, he said: "I almost had a heart attack. The implications of this are pretty astounding."

Read More >>

Florida's New Voting Machines
Funny Flash Animation

New security glitch found in Diebold system

May 10, 2006

Armed with a little basic knowledge of Diebold voting systems and a standard component available at any computer store, someone with a minute or two of access to a Diebold touch screen could load virtually any software into the machine and disable it, redistribute votes or alter its performance in myriad ways.

Here are the details. Built into the software that runs the Diebold machines is a piece of code called an interpreter. This is similar to the BASIC language found on older computers like the Apple II, the Commodore 64, etc. The interpreter accepts instructions written in a specific language, translates them into executable instructions, and then executes those instructions.
What Black Box voting has found is that when a memory card is inserted into the Diebold machines, the software quickly checks the memory card for files written in that special language. If none are found, the machine operates normally and can pass all inspections and tests for accuracy. But, if the particular memory card inserted into the machine, on election day, has a file written in that special language, that file is read by the interpreter and the instructions carried out. Such a program can change vote results, erase audit trails, and even erase the program file on the memory card to conceal what has been done. The person inserting the card may not even know what is going on.

There is no reason for such an interpreter system to be in a voting machine. The theory of a voting machine is that the software is locked in and unchangeable. All it does is count button presses and save the record. There is no legitimate need for an on-board interpreter that looks for an executes programs on the vote tabulation memory cards.

The point is this; this interpreter proves that the problems with the voting machines are not "glitches". They are intentional functions designed into the systems, with the sole purpose of stealing elections for whomever the owners of the machines are working for.

Read More >>

SEC INVESTIGATION OF DIEBOLD UNDER WAY

Bradblog - 05.10.06

The investigation of Diebold by the SEC, which we had heard previously about through background sources over the past several months, comes on the heels of a class action Securities Fraud litigation suit, originally reported exclusively by The BRAD BLOG just before it was filed last December.

Read More >>

No `verify,' no trust

May 10, 2006

Scratch your head over a report on the 2004 general election in Miami-Dade from the county's Election Reform Coalition (www.reformcoalition.org). Among a pile of puzzlements, it concludes that seven polling places had between 50 and 99 more voters than ballots and that four polling places had over 100 more voters than ballots. In addition, six polling places had between 52 and 100 more ballots than voters, and one polling place had 282 more ballots than voters.

Read More >>

Poll Rage? Man Breaks Machines At Polling Location

CLEVELAND -- A 61-year-old man was arrested after an alleged poll rage incident, NewsChannel5 reported.

Officials said Marc A. Fenster was arrested after he knocked over two voting machines worth $2,700 each.

They also said he assaulted a 17-year-old outside the polling place.

Fenster faces disorderly conduct, obstructing official business and resisting arrest charges.

It took several people to restrain Fenster, who was trying to vote at a 4330 Jennings Road.

It's unclear what caused him to become upset.

Link >>

E-VOTE MELTDOWN

Voters Given Paper Ballots as Machines Break Down in Ohio

via Bradblog - 5/2/2006

SHAKER HEIGHTS, Ohio -- There have been some problems at polling locations throughout Cuyahoga County, NewsChannel5 reported.

Because of some confusion at the polling locations, citizens are being given ballots to fill out by hand, said Micheal [sic] Vu, director of the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections.

At about 6:45 a.m. at Woodberry Elementary School in Shaker Heights, a resident left the polling location after growing extremely frustrated about the process.

There were several problems with the new electronic voting machines throughout Cuyahoga County.

Read More >>

Polls Stay Open Until 9:30 At Garden Valley

via CLG

02 May 2006 (OH) A judge ordered the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections [Remember Cuyahoga County from the 2004 Bush coup d'etat?] to keep the polling location at Garden Valley Neighborhood House at 7100 Kinsman Ave. open until 9:30 p.m. Tuesday When poll workers had trouble setting up the equipment in the morning, the polling place didn't open until 1:30 p.m. for voting... With all the problems reported at the polls Tuesday, NewsChannel5 has learned that the absentee results will be delayed. About 17,000 absentee votes will have to be hand counted because of a problem with optical scanners. There were also reports of problems with the new electronic machines. Both machines are made by Diebold ...

Read More >>

Electronic Voting Switch Threatens Mass Confusion

The Financial Times - 01 May 2006

The last three election cycles in the US have been marked by controversy not only about candidates, but also about the fairness and accuracy of the voting process. And as voters head to the polls today for primaries in some jurisdictions, the coming cycle promises more of the same.

With about 8,000 separate election authorities managing approximately 175,000 polling places and perhaps as many as 150,000 different ballot forms that include choices for everyone from senator to dogcatcher, American elections are complex even when all goes well. But this cycle sees many states and smaller jurisdictions making last-minute efforts to switch to electronic voting, and early signs of trouble are appearing.

In California, the League of Women Voters has protested against a new, computerised statewide election registry that the group says is improperly rejecting registered voters, while county clerks in several Indiana jurisdictions complained that the electronic ballots programmed by the vendors of their electronic voting machines had been delivered late, were incorrect and poorly proofread.

The clerk for Marion County - the state's most populous - said that, so far, nine rounds of "fixes" had been required; she was unsure whether the primary vote today could be held without problems, according to The Indianapolis Star.

The scramble to convert to electronic voting has spurred disputes with vendors of the new machines. Last month, Oregon filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Election Systems & Software, alleging that the company reneged on a commitment to supply the state with electronic voting machines suitable for handicapped people for its May 16 primary.

In Florida, ground zero for election disasters in 2000, the election supervisor for Leon County allowed anti-electronic voting activists to try breaching security in the county's optical scan voting system, prompting the big three electronic voting systems companies - Diebold, Election Systems & Services, and Sequoia - to refuse to sell the county new machines. The Florida secretary of state has since opened an anti-trust investigation.

[...] One problem is that many of the new voting machines that will be deployed are arriving from offshore manufacturing sites - mainly China - and are being rushed into service without adequate quality controls, says Kimball Brace, president of Election Data Services, a voting consultancy firm.

Read More >>

The Approaching 2006 E-Voting 'Train Wreck'

Investigations and Problems Continue to Spread
Texas, Ohio, West Virginia, Arkansas and Indiana

John Gideon - May 1, 2006

[...] The Electronic Voting Machine Vendor locomotive is still running away down the track at an alarming speed. However, this week some states and county election officials seem to be beginning to notice and are now sending out signals that they intend to either stop the train or – barring that -- at least ensure that companies such as Election Systems and Software (ES&S) do not profit too much from their arrogance, ineptitude and now epidemic failures.

Legal complaints against the company were filed this week in West Virginia and Indiana to add to the one previously under way in Oregon. Threats have been heard from Texas, Arkansas, Ohio and elsewhere. Election officials have been forced to change voting procedures in many states and counties to accommodate for ES&S' growing array of failures.

Meanwhile no one seems to be talking about the people who will be most affected by this train wreck; the voters…

Read More >>