**Election Reform in the news- 2 NATIONAL publications TODAY!**

[MelissaB]

Debating the Bugs of High-Tech Voting
Test of Software in Machines Renews Security Concerns

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Special to The Washington Post
Tuesday, May 30, 2006; Page A15

The already-cantankerous debate over high-tech voting machines, which have been installed in great numbers in recent years, is growing more intense and convoluted as primaries get underway and the midterm election nears.

A coalition of voting rights activists and prominent computer scientists argues that some of the machines are not sufficiently secure against tampering and could result in disputed elections, while voting machine vendors and many election officials say that view is exaggerated.

The latest dispute occurred several weeks ago after it was discovered at a test in Utah that someone with a reasonable knowledge of computer code could gain access to and tamper with the system software on a popular brand of voting machine manufactured by Diebold Election Systems. The developments prompted California and Pennsylvania to send urgent warnings to counties that use Diebold's touch-screen voting systems to take additional steps to secure them.

...snip

But Diebold spokesman David Bear said it was a "functionality" that company engineers had built into the voting machines so their software could be easily updated, and it only becomes an vulnerability if an unauthorized person gains unfettered access to the machine, and there are safeguards against that happening.


More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/29/AR2006052900816.html

JUNE 5, 2006

One Man, One Vote, One Conspiracy Theory
Critics of electronic balloting are raising questions about a voting machine supplier

After the controversial 2000 Presidential election, the U.S. embarked on a campaign to replace paper ballots and their infamous hanging chads with electronic voting. But the new systems, many based on touch screens similar to bank ATMs, have become the bane of computer experts and some political activists on the Left.

Critics say the systems are riddled with security leaks that could allow corrupt companies or polling officials to steal elections. Now the complicated ownership of one of the nation's top three voting-equipment companies has attracted a new cadre of doubters.

The company, Sequoia Voting Systems Inc., sells machines in California, Illinois, and 18 other states. It has come under fire because its majority shareholders are Venezuelan. In the colorful imaginations of some, the Sequoia story is a tale that ends with Venezuela's leftist President Hugo Chávez, a foe of the Bush Administration, in a position to manipulate American elections.

In Washington, Representative Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) has asked the Treasury Dept. to explain Sequoia's sale to the Venezuelans last year. "It doesn't seem like the deal...was vetted by our government, and I want to know why," she said in a May 5 letter.

Following a contentious Apr. 7 hearing on Sequoia's role in a recent Chicago primary, city Alderman Edward M. Burke, a relatively conservative Democrat, said: "We've stumbled on what we think could be an international conspiracy to subvert the electoral process in the United States." Burke offered no proof, and despite similar concerns expressed by other Chicago pols, the city and Cook County will continue to use Sequoia equipment.

DISPUTED ELECTION
Sequoia officials insist that neither Chávez nor the Venezuelan government has had any link to the company. "There is absolutely, unequivocally no connection," insists Sequoia Vice-President Michelle M. Shafer. But Sequoia's ownership is elaborate. The Oakland (Calif.) business was acquired for $16 million in March, 2005, by Boca Raton (Fla.)-based Smartmatic Corp. Smartmatic is owned by a Netherlands holding company, which in turn is owned by Smartmatic International Group, based in Curaçao.


More: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_23/b3987042.htm?chan=tc&chan=technology_technology+index+page_more+of+today's+top+stories

Discussion in ER here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x430400

[MissWaverly]

1. Oh, so vote rigging is not okay when it's from Hugo

As long as it from Big Bush supporters like Wally, oh, well, okay, then, nothing to see here
but now that's it's Hugo, oh no! Hypocrites.

[MelissaB]

2. Well, I'm hoping it scares the conservatives and makes them

think about what we are doing with these machines that "count" our votes.

[MissWaverly]

6. I agree with you but I hate their double standard

Republican's Grand Strategy = any dirty trick is okay as long as it: 1) either benefits
the wealthy or 2) insures that we win.

[MelissaB]

3. Here's another from NYT: Block the Vote

Block the Vote

Published: May 30, 2006

In a country that spends so much time extolling the glories of democracy, it's amazing how many elected officials go out of their way to discourage voting. States are adopting rules that make it hard, and financially perilous, for nonpartisan groups to register new voters. They have adopted new rules for maintaining voter rolls that are likely to throw off many eligible voters, and they are imposing unnecessarily tough ID requirements.

...snip

These three techniques — discouraging registration drives, purging eligible voters and imposing unreasonable ID requirements — keep showing up. Colorado recently imposed criminal penalties on volunteers who slip up in registration drives. Georgia, one of several states to adopt harsh new voter ID laws, had its law struck down by a federal court.

Protecting the integrity of voting is important, but many of these rules seem motivated by a partisan desire to suppress the vote, and particular kinds of voters, rather than to make sure that those who are entitled to vote — and only those who are entitled — do so. The right to vote is fundamental, and Congress and state legislatures should not pass laws that put an unnecessary burden on it. If they do, courts should strike them down.


More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/30/opinion/30tue1.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

[mod mom]

4. Excellent. Democracy is not a spectator sport and we will not win until

we have fair, transparent and VERIFIABLE elections!

[Junkdrawer]

5. Ignore --> "Conspiracy Theory" --> Bad Legislation --> Real reform

I guess we're at "Conspiracy Theory". Can bad legislation be far away? :shrug:

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

10. We've already had bad legislation - HAVA

nm

[Junkdrawer]

13. Oh boy howdy is it bad. But I was referring to a further watered down...

"compromise" version of the Rush Holt legislation that would say a "Voter Verified Paper Trail" is mandatory, but is only to be counted:

1.) In the case of a close election. (Just steal by a bigger margin).

2.) Or asks for a small random audit, but doesn't specify what "random" means. (See Ohio 2004 "recount")

[mod mom]

14. Or Ohio HB 3 which requires Voter IDs and prevents contesting elections.

HB3 requires an ID that can be very difficult to produce with the effect  
of denying the vote to thousands of Ohio voters; complicates and  
inhibits the process of helping register new voters and makes errors by  
workers a  felony; removes all election audits of the black boxes used  
to count the votes; and makes it impossible (not legal) to challenge an  
election in court.

[Junkdrawer]

15. Ohio HB 3 is a stinker too, but it just tries to confuse "voter reform"...

with "election reform". It's "ignore phase" legislation. I'm talking about the bad legislation that will come when the distrust of the new machines is so widespread it can't be ignored.

[mod mom]

11. We are beyond "conspiracy" and into "coincidence" as well as exposure of

the bad legislation. There will be some big names/articles coming out in the near future!

[CornField]

7. becomes an vulnerability if an unauthorized person gains unfettered access

"...becomes an vulnerability if an unauthorized person gains unfettered access..."

Now, let's see... when would an individual be all alone with a voting machine... a time when no one would question what he/she is doing all alone with a voting machine...

[MelissaB]

8. Or, lets say somebody like Ken Blackwell has the computers networked

which he wasn't supposed to do. Now, I'm not saying J. Kenneth Blackwell would ever do such a thing. As secretary of statee, I'm sure he wants all votes to be counted... properly.

[mod mom]

12. Given recent elections & knowing that a party turnover will allow subpoena

power, there can be no doubt that we will see massive disenfranchisement (voter IDs, Phone jammer now teaching GOP campaign school) and manipulation of the vote. If anyone thinks that this time they will play fair...I've got a bridge to sell you.

[alfredo]

16. Wasn't he allowed unsupervised access to the main tabulator?

[MelissaB]

18. I believe he was the "supervisor."

:(

[alfredo]

19. yeah, of the bush campaign.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

9. That's not a bug, it's an undocumented feature

old software developer's joke

[WiseButAngrySara]

17. This is good! Now they need to report Diebold's contributions to

the RNC and the promise of Ohio's vote to B*.

KNR!

[Kurovski]

20. K&R(nt)

[Joe Chi Minh]

21. You don't say...!!! In his piece in the Washington Post, Zachary

A Goldfarb, quotes Michael I. Shamos, a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University (now there's a thing):

"Unlike many colleagues in his field, who has worked on election issues for about 20 years, has not generally been seen as a friend of the activists.

In 2004, they assailed Maryland's decision to buy Diebold touch-screen machines and asked a court to stop the state from using them. Shamos testified that with a few additional steps, the machines could be used without problem, and the court agreed.

Now, Shamos wonders. He is confident in his testimony and believes most security holes can be plugged. But he wonders whether Diebold cares enough about security and the sanctity of elections.

"There's a broader philosophical question that's been worrying me more and more lately," Shamos said. "What are these companies really doing? They don't seem to have embraced the seriousness with which people in this country take their elections. It's been kind of an adversarial thing where companies want to make profits, and they just haven't spent enough time and energy designing secure systems."

Like marriage more generally, politics in the US is a blood sport. I've been following US politics for 5 or 6 years. How long has he lived in that cauldron?

[Junkdrawer]

22. Having sold his soul to the Voting Machine Industry...

Mike seems to have developed a case of Seller's Regret.

[Joe Chi Minh]

25. Brilliant, hilarious signature!

[Justice Is Comin]

23. "Functionality"

Oh, that's the new name for the Leggo toy change-at-will vote tabulators now.

[Wilms]

24. K&R n/t