Speaking of Diebold: The Center for Information Technology Policy at Princeton University has released a "Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine" which proves that these machines are about as vulnerable as a naked 19-year-old blonde tied to a bed in the middle of a men's prison where all the guards are snoozing or strung out on dope.
Abstract: This paper presents a fully independent security study of a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine, including its hardware and software. We obtained the machine from a private party. Analysis of the machine, in light of real election procedures, shows that it is vulnerable to extremely serious attacks. For example, an attacker who gets physical access to a machine or its removable memory card for as little as one minute could install malicious code; malicious code on a machine could steal votes undetectably, modifying all records, logs, and counters to be consistent with the fraudulent vote count it creates. An attacker could also create malicious code that spreads automatically and silently from machine to machine during normal election activities — a voting-machine virus. We have constructed working demonstrations of these attacks in our lab. Mitigating these threats will require changes to the voting machine's hardware and software and the adoption of more rigorous election procedures.But do they need computers to do their dirty work? Greg Palast argues otherwise in Armed Madhouse. The growing Republican drive for photo ID will do a remarkably effective job of keeping poor and minority voters from the polls. From the Los Angeles Times:
One example of the skirmishing came late last month in a federal courtroom in Phoenix, where a Navajo leader, occasionally speaking in his tribal language, testified that thousands of his people would lose their right to cast ballots under a new Arizona law that requires voters to present a photo ID or other proof of identity at the polls.If we really wanted to increase voter turnout, we would pass laws making registration information private. I've said this before, but it bears repeating (especially since few others make the point): Computers make information easy to access and distribute. There are going to be a lot of bankrupties soon, and people are going to have to choose between exercizing the right to vote and hiding from creditors. The victims of Republican economic mismanagement will be the ones most afraid to visit the voting both.
The leader, Leonard Gorman, testified that many Navajo who spend their lives herding sheep in remote areas cannot fulfill the new requirements because they do not drive, nor do they have mailboxes or even the utility bills that are accepted as alternative forms of identification under the new law.
For a long time now, we've wondered if pre-election polling was gamed. After all, vote-rigging would be a lot easier if fictional computerized tallies matched the equally-fictional predictions of leading pollsters. Well, now we know that Republicans (if you can count Lieberman among their number, as many would argue we ought) have indeed come up with fake polls. Tracy Costin of DataUSA (a.k.a. Viewpoint USA) has been found guilty of wire fraud related to her penchant for fake polling:
Costin told employees to alter poll data, and managers at the company told employees to "talk to cats and dogs" when instructing them to fabricate the surveys.In another story, this tidbit caught my eye:
An FBI affidavit from 2004 quotes a supervisor of the company estimating that 50 percent of the data sent to Bush's campaign was falsified.
Leonard Mastri, Costin's ex-husband, told the FBI the results for a Metro-North survey were fabricated.What a fun couple! Our democracy is safe is such hands...
Mastri, the former owner of Computer Guys and PM Consulting in Bridgeport, was arrested and convicted for selling computers stolen from Sikorsky Aircraft.
5 comments:
Here's a fast fact from Maryland's State Elections webpage link called Myth v. Fact:
Myth: Paper receipts solve the concerns regarding electronic voting system fraud.
Fact: Paper receipts provide a false sense of security, because
they do not guarantee that the results recorded in the
machine are the same results printed on the receipt.
THINK about that fact.
Miss P.
Absolutely true. But paper receipts do give us something to recount.
That doesn't mean our problems end there. A recount happens only under certain circumstances. Keep the margin of victory just wide enouogh to avoid an automatic recount, and a losing candidate must fork over some big bucks to make a recount happen.
And then there are the chain of custody issues. By the time the recount arrives (if it arrives) the paper ballots will have been stored -- somewhere -- for weeks. They're under seal, but seals can be faked. We saw the strange doings during the Ohio recount...people having access who should not have it, and so on.
No election system is utterly safe. The safEST system would involve all paper ballots, counted by hand, with representatives of all parties and international observers overseeing every step of the process. PLUS genuinely objective exit polling by company commanding international respect, both to give overnight results (as they do, accurately, in Europe) and as another "double-checking" mechanism.
If I had to go with machines (which I'm totally against), I'm in favor of paper receipts (etc.), and if my paper receipt said something different than what I voted then I would know that immediately.
When I posted the myth/fact I was thinking their statement was pretty much an admission that there is no guarantee that the machine would register the vote correctly.
Even if their statement was part of a logical argument to keep machines, it doesn't cover half the potential problems that using machines could create, like you say.
Any chance the public can vote on which type of voting mechanism they want, rather than leave it to the SOS's?
Miss P.
P.S. You heard about Mitofsky's death, yes?
Excellent post. We need to go back to the English Civil War to understand the tension that has been with us since that incredible time. There are those who wish to expand the franchise and those who wish to contract it. It's that simple. Using this template, we can look at any technology, policy, law, regulation, practice, custom, etc. and determine who is a true democrat and who is carrying the torches for the right wing oligarchs.
The Compromise of 1876 saw the end of black voting in the South. It's never been as high as during Reconstruction. In that case, both parties conspired in public to give away the vote. It's been a struggle ever since.
Fundamentally, anti democratic positions and policies are race crimes and crimes against the poor: key point that the technologically focused need to understand. These machines stink but they really stink when blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans use them.
Get ready; we're rokken into the second half of our first (and maybe last) decade of the 21st century. 2006 will be a mess. I predict that the new targets will be Latinos. It probably has something to do with the millions brought to the streets in April-May.
Diebold, voter suppression, felon disenfranchisement, good old manipulation of totals, lies and, the lubricant,” campaign contributions" (from anybody) will come up with a toxic stew in 2006, a vulgar display of craven behavior by those who wish to exclude and diminish those who need the vote the very most.
Michael Collins
Re; Polling Fraud Article.
I worked at DataUSA for the years in question and I KNOW firsthand that there was no polling fraud, but instead battered wife syndrome. Ms. Costin married Mastri (the company programmer) and after three week of abuse filed for divorce. He broke in to the company and promised to destroy her and her company for dumping him. He is a scary psychopath and the FBI loved his story!
You should be writing about how the FBI came in and finished her off for him. Threatening $7.50/hr employees with jail if they would not LIE about the fraud, looking for cheapshot headlines! Everyone who would lie got immunity! DataUSA NEVER polled for BUSH or LIEBERMAN! DataUSA's polls came in within 1-2% accuracy everytime! How could they cheat?!?!
SHAME on a backwards SYSTEM!
Post a Comment