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

Skip to comments.

E-Voting Bites
CBS News ^ | Oct 23, 2006 | Genevieve Smith.

Posted on 10/23/2006 7:18:25 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent

What will happen in November? Are electronic voting machines secure? One need not believe in a vast plot to rig the elections to take those questions seriously — and to be pessimistic about the answers.

When Princeton researchers announced in September that the Diebold Accuvote TS voting machine software was vulnerable to tampering, it was the first time that independent computer scientists had confirmed the weaknesses long suspected in techie circles. A few days later, in a minute-and-a-half segment on Fox News, Professor Edward Felten demonstrated just how easy it would be to steal an election (to which the blonde and tanned anchors responded with the canned surprise you'd expect from a demonstration of a new food processor).

(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 10/23/2006 7:18:26 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Mmmkay, they're already laying the groundwork for the "we were robbed!" wail.

And as if the Rats are not the king of stealing elections. They do know of what they speak!


2 posted on 10/23/2006 7:19:21 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Absolutely... they are going to claim foul... but it makes them look even more looney... so let them.


3 posted on 10/23/2006 7:20:30 PM PDT by tomnbeverly (Terrorists cut our heads off and get medals. We put hoods on theirs and get sent to prison. hmmm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

All Your DieBold Voting Machines Are Belong To Us


4 posted on 10/23/2006 7:20:41 PM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Anything from CBS news is automatically discounted as false until it shows up in ten other major news distributors, not including CNN, ABC, NBC, PBS, LAT, NYT or the Boston Globe.


5 posted on 10/23/2006 7:21:31 PM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

6 posted on 10/23/2006 7:22:32 PM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

They ought to use paper ballots and scanners. These machines
are bad if for no other reason than they are so controversial
and undermine confidence in elections where they are used.


7 posted on 10/23/2006 7:23:45 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
The Princeton researchers lied. Look at their video, read their written report. They outright lied with intent to deceive.
8 posted on 10/23/2006 7:25:24 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
They ought to use paper ballots and scanners. These machines are bad if for no other reason than they are so controversial and undermine confidence in elections where they are used.

Sure, lets go back to hanging and pregnant chads while we're at it

9 posted on 10/23/2006 7:26:14 PM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182

"undermine confidence"

Because of constant media hype, and failure for MSM to really look at what a hoax the Princeton study was.

Tell the truth and the confidence comes back.


10 posted on 10/23/2006 7:26:39 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Why did SEEBS reference a professor as an expert on voting machine vulnerabilities? We know any sub-level DNC operative is a resident expert with a boatload of practical in the field experience at rigging free elections.


11 posted on 10/23/2006 7:28:11 PM PDT by petertare (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight; Anti-Bubba182

How about teams of psychologists to look at undervoted ballots to determine the intent of the voter? That almost worked.


12 posted on 10/23/2006 7:28:46 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

bwwwwaaaaahhhh!

Call the waaaaaaammmmmbulance!


13 posted on 10/23/2006 7:29:41 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Actually, it's not false. It's "fake, but accurate."


14 posted on 10/23/2006 7:30:05 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

15 posted on 10/23/2006 7:31:13 PM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

Check out the "expert" quoted in the article: he says something like (**whine**) "at least with hanging chads we knew what we didn't know."

Just like the Rats. Same reasoning as "well, we had *good intentions* . . ."


16 posted on 10/23/2006 7:31:21 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

Golly, that was some kind of ride, I tell ya.


17 posted on 10/23/2006 7:32:21 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

I used the punch cards for years. There is no problem with
hanging chads IF the voter looks at the ballot before they turn it in.


18 posted on 10/23/2006 7:33:07 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Genevieve Smith is an editorial intern at Harper's magazine.


19 posted on 10/23/2006 7:35:01 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Soooo true!


20 posted on 10/23/2006 7:39:20 PM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

Where I am, we have electronic voting machines that also print out everything that is chosen. (The voter can watch to check.) It seems like the best of both worlds - quick returns and a paper trail.


21 posted on 10/23/2006 7:40:13 PM PDT by kc8ukw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
I used the punch cards for years. There is no problem with hanging chads IF the voter looks at the ballot before they turn it in.

And I've used the mechanical push-lever machines here in New York State for years, and they didn't 'develop a problem' until Pataki and Giuliani and then Bloomberg were elected and then re-elected .... /shrug

22 posted on 10/23/2006 7:41:35 PM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

Well, hell! All this time I've been worried about the 'Rats taking back Congress! Turns out I had nothing to fear-we're gonna STEAL it! How cool! I'll sleep SO much better tonight!

ANYTHING to keep the 'Rats outta power!


23 posted on 10/23/2006 7:44:01 PM PDT by mozarky2 (Ya never stand so tall as when ya stoop to stomp a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182

Went to vote this morning, and the machines were down. I don't worry about elections being stolen, just the normal problems with machines and computers. I don't understand why they cannot have a machine/computer voting system in which, when you indicate you are finished, it not only records your vote, it also gives you a slip of paper that you can check (like a reciept). Then, you could slip that into a ballot box, so that if they had to do a recount, they could use those little paper ballots.
susie


24 posted on 10/23/2006 7:44:07 PM PDT by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kc8ukw

Oh, darn, I thought I was having an original idea! Doh! ;)
susie


25 posted on 10/23/2006 7:45:32 PM PDT by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

They lied!!! I saw this segment!!! Diebold had on an engineer that had a machine and stated that the new firmware they use in the machines now, secures holes in previous software versions. They have created safety valves that open up if certain watermarks are not present in the firmware upload. Any attempt at tampering with the firmware will render the machine useless, but not before making a mirror file of the original votes logged.

LLS


26 posted on 10/23/2006 7:48:21 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
Golly, that was some kind of ride, I tell ya.

Six Flags couldn't have come up with a more severe roller coaster ride, ehhh ?

27 posted on 10/23/2006 7:48:38 PM PDT by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: brytlea

it also gives you a slip of paper that you can check (like a reciept). Then, you could slip that into a ballot box, so that if they had to do a recount, they could use those little paper ballots.


They do except you can only view it through a window,
and is rolled up on a spool. All voting machines in california should have this now.


28 posted on 10/23/2006 7:57:49 PM PDT by ThomasThomas (Red is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

29 posted on 10/23/2006 7:59:29 PM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas

It sounds like a good option. Of course, I would like to go back to the old paper ballots, but I think that's because I'm getting old...
susie


30 posted on 10/23/2006 8:14:44 PM PDT by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
Anything from CBS news is automatically discounted as false until it shows up in ten other major news distributors, not including CNN, ABC, NBC, PBS, LAT, NYT or the Boston Globe.

The level of security on the Diebold machines is shameful. There are thousands of keys to the machine in circulation (the security is slightly better than a suitcase lock, but not by much). Someone with a key to a machine and a suitably-formatted memory card can do whatever they want with the software in the machine. Their software can if desired alter votes and then erase any trace of itself.

Any machine used for voting should have all code and parameters stored on a medium that can be read out in its entirety without running any code thereon, and can be protected against alteration from before the time it's read by both parties before the election until after the time it's read by both parties after the election. One of many simple and fundamental security principles that Diebold completely failed to grasp (that a mini-bar key can open the machines is just the icing on the cake).

31 posted on 10/23/2006 8:18:59 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

"And as if the Rats are not the king of stealing elections. They do know of what they speak!"

While that may be true. The premice of the article is also true. These machines are a bad idea.


32 posted on 10/23/2006 8:19:02 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

How about get rid of the untraceable electronic crap and the confidence comes back?


33 posted on 10/23/2006 8:21:10 PM PDT by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
the new firmware they use in the machines now, secures holes in previous software versions

Yeah, just like the new version of Windows is secure -- LOL.

34 posted on 10/23/2006 8:22:55 PM PDT by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DBrow
The Princeton researchers lied. Look at their video, read their written report. They outright lied with intent to deceive.

How were they deceptive? I'll admit that at the time the report was written, they may have underplayed the fact that attacking the machine requires physically opening it. Given, however, that the machine can be opened with a mini-bar key, that doesn't seem like much of an omission by the researchers.

Certainly Diebold claims that the security holes are fixed, but from what I can tell they are not fixed in any way that would prevent someone with inside knowledge from hacking the machines in such a way as to fake vote totals and then remove all trace of the hack.

There are some simple principles that can and should be applied that would make an attack very difficult even by someone with full inside knowledge. So far as I can tell, Diebold has made no effort to make their machines secure against insider attacks. Why?

35 posted on 10/23/2006 8:23:33 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas
They do except you can only view it through a window, and is rolled up on a spool.

If it's rolled up on a spool, how do they prevent reconstruction of the order in which votes were cast?

36 posted on 10/23/2006 8:24:33 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

I don't trust e-voting. Too easy to manipulate. Personally, I would much rather punch a paper ballot.


37 posted on 10/23/2006 8:24:55 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
I'd feel a lot better if the source for the voting system was opened up maybe four years before electronic voting went live. Can you imagine how much hacker scrutiny it'd be subjected to in that time?

In the meantime, the states can simply inform their citizens that they must apply due diligence when punching holes in their ballots and any malformed ballots, if questioned, will be discarded. The hanging chad and butterfly ballot debacles were just evidence that some people don't need to be voting.

38 posted on 10/23/2006 8:28:59 PM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maggief

That nutter needs a straitjacket.


39 posted on 10/23/2006 8:32:12 PM PDT by headstamp (Nothing lasts forever, Unless it does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: supercat

The Ohio Diebold machines have paper trail stored in them.


40 posted on 10/23/2006 8:32:58 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Yeah. We all know how much the Liberals trust those things, and how qualified they are to use them...


41 posted on 10/23/2006 8:33:08 PM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

I don't care how much liberals trust or don't trust paper ballots. A 14 year old kid can't hack a paper election.


42 posted on 10/23/2006 9:14:12 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

I love these old mechanical machines. They've worked, never a hint of scandal, easy to operate and count the votes simply and accurately.

I dread the new "improved" stuff we've got coming to us.


43 posted on 10/23/2006 9:21:20 PM PDT by cydcharisse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: supercat
If it's rolled up on a spool, how do they prevent reconstruction of the order in which votes were cast?


The rolls are not assessable to the poll workers and would be read only if there were a recount by the worker in the counting office. Each polling place has several voting machines. Also after you made all your choices it is printed on the paper for you to view, then you have the choice of changing if you made a mistake. There must be a process that marks these as not valid and then prints your new choices. In case of a recount these must be removed somehow. At my poll I go to any open machine. Other than these things I don't know what is done at the count office.
44 posted on 10/23/2006 10:35:14 PM PDT by ThomasThomas (Red is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas
The rolls are not assessable to the poll workers and would be read only if there were a recount by the worker in the counting office.

In a proper secret-ballot election, it's impossible for anyone to ever tell how a particular person voted unless the election was all but unanimous in a particular precinct (if there were 300 ballots cast in a precinct, 299 of them were for Joe Quimby, and one was for Lionel Hutz, the person who voted for Lionel Hutz would know that each of the other 299 ballots was cast by someone voting for Quimby).

If the ballots are stored, in order, on a paper roll there's no way a voter can be sure people won't discover how he voted. By contrast, if someone drops a card into a box which is large relative to the number of cards such that the card can fall randomly, then (especially if the box is turned over occasionally) it's impossible to associate any particular ballot with any particular voter.

45 posted on 10/23/2006 10:40:13 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: supercat

I have never seen anyone wearing gloves to vote. Paper ballots are touched by each voter leaving fingers prints. My polling place is in a privately owned clubhouse where cameras would be easy to hide. Impossible is impossible. The best we can do is highly improbable. As for the Lionel Hutz, Quimby vote. Quimby would get Fat Tony to replace all the paper ballots with his own.


46 posted on 10/23/2006 11:14:48 PM PDT by ThomasThomas (Red is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Yes...a 14 year old can hack a paper ballot.

The most secure computers around can be hacked if physical access to them is granted.

Paper ballots can be added to, altered, removed or destroyed if access to them is not strictly monitored. When someone can confirm on each and every singular base by base casis that ALL ballots are in custody of a VERIFIABLY trusted organization, then I will concede that paper is inherently safer.


47 posted on 10/24/2006 3:51:58 AM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

The real problem is trust,, for decades the League of Women Voters in Miami-Dade stole elections for RATS by pre-punching ballots for the RAT candidates (using a drill press with a smooth punch ,, doing dozens of ballots at a time),, in 1992 they were caught by 2 Miami Herald reporters in the act who took some of the "spoiled" ballots to the Dade AG (Janet Reno) ,, Reno had the reporters arrested for stealing the election materials... it was then that Clinton saw her value and picked her up for his team.. Using the drill press for punching ballots lead to some off-center punches , and some incomplete punches ("pregnant") .. of course all ballots that had both a valid Bush punch and the manufactured Gore punch were automatically invalidated..

I don't like the electronic machines ,, they will always be susceptible to hacking ,, best to go with the punch card or scanner options.


48 posted on 10/24/2006 7:03:48 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight
Sure, lets go back to hanging and pregnant chads while we're at it

Optical scan ballots have the lowest error rates, period. No punch-cards, simply mark the correct box. You can even make sure your ballot scans correctly before you drop it in the ballot box.

It's simple, accountable, and has a complete paper trail.

49 posted on 10/24/2006 7:05:59 AM PDT by kevkrom (War is not about proportionality. Knitting is about proportionality. War is about winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
The hacker couldn't break their encryption. MS is a joke... and if you don't think that MS leaves holes and backdoors on purpose, I have bridge to sell you! LOL

LLS
50 posted on 10/24/2006 7:28:35 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 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