Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Electronic Voting Firm Has Site Hacked
AP ^ | 12-29-03 | TED BRIDIS

Posted on 12/29/2003 2:38:03 PM PST by Indy Pendance

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A company developing security technology for electronic voting suffered an embarrassing hacker break-in that executives think was tied to the rancorous debate over the safety of casting ballots online.

VoteHere Inc. of Bellevue, Wash., confirmed Monday that U.S. authorities are investigating a break-in of its computers months ago, when someone roamed its internal computer network. The intruder accessed internal documents and may have copied sensitive software blueprints that the company planned eventually to disclose publicly.

Chief executive Jim Adler said VoteHere was confident it knew the identity of its hacker and had already turned over "megabytes of evidence" to the FBI and Secret Service. It also repaired the hole in its computer network the intruder used to gain entry in October over the Internet, he said.

U.S. authorities confirmed the investigation but declined to comment further.

Adler would not identify the company's chief suspect but said he thinks the person was linked to the debate over the security of electronic voting. The same individual may be tied to the theft in March of internal documents from Diebold Election Systems of Canton, Ohio.

"We caught the intruder, identified him by name. We know where he lives," Adler said. "We think this is political. There have been break-ins around election companies over the last several months, and we think this is related."

VoteHere, which is privately held, disclosed the federal investigation to stress that the break-in did not affect the integrity of its voting technology, Adler said. The company also wanted to pre-empt any criticisms of electronic voting based on public disclosures of its internal records.

"I have no problem debating the merits of electronic voting with anyone, but breaking and entering is not an appropriate forum for technology debate," Adler said.

Adler said the intruder accessed internal corporate documents and may have copied sensitive "source code," blueprints for software. But Adler said VoteHere planned eventually to reveal that source code, which is protected under patents, for review by outside security researchers.

"Given the political sensitivity to this issue, we felt it was important to get out on this," Adler said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: diebold; electronicvoting; nov2004dryrun; votehere
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 12/29/2003 2:38:03 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Makes me feel safe!
2 posted on 12/29/2003 2:44:07 PM PST by Ingtar (Understanding is a three-edged sword : your side, my side, and the truth in between ." -- Kosh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance; sistergoldenhair
Bump; ping.
3 posted on 12/29/2003 2:46:17 PM PST by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
I sense the essence of Al Gore smewhere in this scandal!
4 posted on 12/29/2003 2:46:46 PM PST by NMFXSTC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
I knew this was bound to happen, and you can bet this will also happen if/when we all are able to stay home in front of the TV and cast our votes online.
5 posted on 12/29/2003 2:47:26 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Anybody surprised? Show of hands? Didn't think so.
6 posted on 12/29/2003 2:54:02 PM PST by CounterCounterCulture (America works best without union pests --- UNION NO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance; Alamo-Girl; Travis McGee; kattracks; Jeff Head; doug from upland; kristinn
Bump.

"I have no problem debating the merits of electronic voting with anyone, but breaking and entering is not an appropriate forum for technology debate," Adler said.

Gee, I thought the technology was to be 'fool-proof'. This is PRECISELY what we have been claiming IS a major weakness. And this is why it is SO INSANE for these companies to refuse to have simultaneous anonymous date-stamped hard-copy paper printout/'receipt' for votes cast... It means that the fraud which could easily be perpetrated by a hacker...will go undetected...or if detected, uncorrectable.

7 posted on 12/29/2003 2:54:20 PM PST by Paul Ross (Reform Islam Now! -- Nuke Mecca!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
In other news:

Gore Wins 2000 Election by a Landslide!

8 posted on 12/29/2003 2:56:51 PM PST by TankerKC (Don’t mistake my defensive response for commitment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
It means that the fraud which could easily be perpetrated by a hacker...will go undetected...or if detected, uncorrectable.

Liberal Democrat Heaven. They've been pushing toward this for years.

9 posted on 12/29/2003 2:59:17 PM PST by Bernard Marx ("Do what you are afraid to do." Anonymous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Nothing to see here. Just the DemocRATS practicing for next November. Move along...
10 posted on 12/29/2003 3:02:14 PM PST by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
There is a difference in hacking a website and hacking thousands of voting machines. Unless they're all connected to a network which is also linked to the outside, someone would have to go to each and every machine and alter the programs.
11 posted on 12/29/2003 3:05:41 PM PST by COEXERJ145
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
There is a difference in hacking a website and hacking thousands of voting machines. Unless they're all connected to a network which is also linked to the outside, someone would have to go to each and every machine and alter the programs.

Not necessarily. All one would have to do would be to insert a 'backdoor' into the firmware that's going to be put into the machines.

12 posted on 12/29/2003 3:12:32 PM PST by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
There is a difference in hacking a website and hacking thousands of voting machines.

Of course there is, and most of us here understand that. However, when their website is hacked (and there are security protocols that will prevent that if followed), it certainly does not instill confidence in their ability to prevent software/machine manipulation during actual voting.

13 posted on 12/29/2003 3:15:33 PM PST by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: Big Midget
Depends, does it harm democrats? Then it's political.
15 posted on 12/29/2003 3:43:04 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
A dry run for Election 2004?
16 posted on 12/29/2003 4:23:55 PM PST by Darksheare (Democrat is between Demise and Demon in the dictionary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
"We caught the intruder, identified him by name. We know where he lives," Adler said. "We think this is political. There have been break-ins around election companies over the last several months, and we think this is related."

Sure you did guys!

You think you know where I live.....Start looking under rocks!!

We exist...despite your puny attempts to silence us !! We shall prevail...regardless of any methods used to silence us in the media.

All of you are doomed!!!

...until we swear in the rightful President of the United states...Pat Paulsen.

17 posted on 12/29/2003 4:34:29 PM PST by Focault's Pendulum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Focault's Pendulum
That there is even a debate considering the ease with which massive,untraceable fraud can be carried out in a system with no physical tallys or ballots shows Americans don't understand the limits of technologies.
18 posted on 12/29/2003 4:43:54 PM PST by hoosierham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Electronic voting makes mass fraud eaiser than the existing methods of voting. The people promoting it are suspect as far as I am concerned.
19 posted on 12/29/2003 5:21:18 PM PST by fightu4it (conquest by immigration and subversion spells the end of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightu4it
Electronic voting makes mass fraud eaiser than the existing methods of voting. The people promoting it are suspect as far as I am concerned.

There are means by which the use of automation in combination with physical ballots could make elections more fraud-resistant than hand-counted paper ballots, but for some reason such means haven't been used. Perhaps some haven't been considered because nobody thought of them, but there does seem to be a preference for means that allow insider fraud.

20 posted on 12/29/2003 5:25:23 PM PST by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson