Skip to comments.Microsoft Muscles the NYS Legislature (Software giant moves to weaken NY Election law)
Posted on 06/17/2007 10:46:20 PM PDT by dayglored
(Bo Lipari is the Executive Director of New Yorkers for Verified Voting, http://www.nyvv.org/)
Microsoft, the 800 pound gorilla of software development has moved forcefully into New York State, supported by voting machine vendors using Microsoft Windows in their touch screen voting machines and other systems. Over the last two months Microsoft and a cadre of high paid lobbyists have been working a full-court press in Albany in an attempt to bring about a serious weakening of New York State election law. This back door effort by private corporations to weaken public protections is about to bear fruit.
On Thursday, June 14, I recieved a copy of proposed changes to New York State Election Law drafted by Microsoft attorneys that has been circulating among the Legislature. These changes would gut the source code escrow and review provisions provided in our current law, which were fought for and won by election integrity activists around the state and adopted by the Legislature in June 2005. In an earlier blog I wrote about Microsoft's unwillingness to comply with New York State's escrow and review requirements. Now the software giant has gone a step further, not just saying we won't comply with your law but actively trying to change state law to serve their corporate interests. Microsoft's attorneys drafted an amendment which would add a paragraph to Section 1-104 of NYS Election Law defining election-dedicated voting system technology.
Microsofts proposed change to state law would effectively render our current requirements for escrow and the ability for independent review of source code in the event of disputes completely meaningless - and with it the protections the public fought so hard for...
(Excerpt) Read more at nyvv.org ...
ROFL that's more outrageous than your first post claiming Chinese have access to the source code but no Americans do. Funniest of all is you support free software like Linux being legally copied, renamed and resold as "Red Flag" in China. Me personally I don't agree with any electronic voting mechanism, nor with Microsoft's proposal, but your unadmitted desire to have it switched to Linux which *IS* actually available to everyone for tampering is hysterical.
Ignoring your comment about 'unadmitted desires', that you can't possibly know, i have to agree with you on electronic voting.
No matter WHAT operating system is used, mischief is easily accomplished, and not so easily detected.
Our leaders really weren't thinking after the 2k election. What we need is a LOW tech voting system...paper ballot and pencil, hand counted.
If ABCCBSNBCCNNFOX, don't like being able to predict results 10 minutes after voting is completed, tough $#!t.
Permanent marker, not pencil, but otherwise I fully agree. Technology is a wonderful thing, but it isn't always the right answer.
1) The original poster suggested this had some tie-in with MS supporting Democrats and this being a tool for them to tilt elections to the Ds. This clearly is not. This is about allowing MS (and also Apple!) developers to participate in the voting equipment market. Technical arguments aside, this is not a political thing, it's a business thing.
2) To my ears, the claim that MS's operating systems are inherently too unreliable to be used in a voting equipment machine sounds a lot like 'Bush lied, troops died.' One of those things that so many seem to accept but when examined is clearly false. So many devices out there use an embedded MS product and it is demonstrably reliable.
3) Voting equipment vendors aren't intentionally choosing an expensive development environment (from MS or Apple) over a free one (*nix) if they didn't determine the decision was, over-all, worth it.
4) You do not need the source code to verify that an OS is authentic. MS would probably co-operate with the state to allow them some kind of check-sum or similar authentication system to determine that the voting equipment machines are not running a broken/hacked OS.
5) These devices are incredibly hard to hack. IF you are worried about the MS devices being hacked, you have to be equally worried about the open-sourced ones being hacked. How do you verify that the code that is deposited is the same code that is on the actual machines? How do you verify that the code isn't hacked after it is installed on a machine? Pretty much every rational objection here being made to allowing an MS device ALSO APPLIES just as much to purely OSS application.
> ROFL that's more outrageous than your first post claiming Chinese have access to the source code but no Americans do. Funniest of all is you support free software like Linux being legally copied, renamed and resold as "Red Flag" in China. Me personally I don't agree with any electronic voting mechanism, nor with Microsoft's proposal, but your unadmitted desire to have it switched to Linux which *IS* actually available to everyone for tampering is hysterical.
Actually, GE, the Communist government of China WAS given copies of Windows source code by Microsoft. They handed copies to their Communist programmers to "evaluate", to make sure the American's weren't hiding backdoors and such. That means they crawled through it, every line. I'd think you'd remember that, it was a big deal a few years ago. Meanwhile, virtually no Americans can look at it, even with an NDA signed in blood.
And no, I don't think Linux is the best OS for voting machines. An embedded RTOS, or something based on BSD, would be my preference, since those are more readily secured. Many flavors of each of those are available in open source so they can be examined.
I don't have any problem admitting my desires: I want to be able to see the process by which my vote is collected and tallied, whether by computer or by paper ballot.
Only as a response to Linux, it being *completely* open source and fully available to the Chicoms with *no* obligation whatsover, not to mention according to the reports 100% of the Windows source wasn't even provided, and even then anyone who wanted to review had to come to the US and register to do it. Check the reports from Russia in my posting history, this is nothing new to anyone, just your poorly veiled attempt to attack Microsoft when you are a known proponent of "open" source yourself.
Meanwhile, virtually no Americans can look at it, even with an NDA signed in blood.
This is simply inaccurate, and further proof you're trying to blame Microsoft for not releasing their code, when releasing source code is something you actually support.
Many flavors of each of those are available in open source so they can be examined.
LMAO. Since you already forgot, this was your supposed complaint against Microsoft - that it was too open. But, just as I guessed, you now instead propose something that is completely open and free to anyone - BSD. Did you really expect to fool anyone? LOL.
in an early post you stated
"ROFL that's more outrageous than your first post claiming Chinese have access to the source code but no Americans do."
you thought that it was so funny that someone would say that the chinese had access to the source code that you were "ROFL."
now in this post you stated
"Only as a response to Linux,"
did you JUST now found out about this or did you really think someone wouldn't call you at on that?
come GE, you know better and you usually do better.
sidenote: IMO BSD would be a good choice, it is secure and you could add some final security without having to tell anyone what they are. a perfect mix of open and closed source.
a perfect system would be electronic with a paper roll that would be viewable but not able to be removed to act as a backup.
You actually think I just found out about "shared source"? As I said, check my posting history, this is old news, it's Microsoft's response to "open source", but not near as open. What's laughable is watching the open sourcers accuse Microsoft of giving something to the Chicomms, when their open source plan is based on giving them everything. Is that not a dirty disguise or what.
that well and good but why did you say this
“ROFL that’s more outrageous than your first post claiming Chinese have access to the source code but no Americans do.”
if you knew better?
argue all you want, it made you look stupid when you turned around a few post later and acknowledge that it was in fact true.
and on your second point, the purpose of linux is not to give code to the chicomms no more then the purpose of microsoft is to have the OS crash every day and infested with viruses. it is just the nature of the each given OS.
ROFL! Dave going postal again, open source fanatics are such a hoot. I didn’t acknowledge it was true, he obviously mischaracterized and twisted the truth, while trying to hide the facts. Microsoft doesn’t give all of their code away, and especially not more to foreigners than Americans as he claimed. The fact you boys support “open” source which does in fact give everything away to everyone on earth for free makes your supposed complaints about it absolutely ridiculous. If you can’t see the blatant hypocrisy on your own bug someone else for an explanation.