rickyjames here. The remainder of text in this submission was provided not by Anonymous Hero, but by me, cutting-and-pasting a few paragraphs of interest from the rather lengthy report which is referenced, then adding some Google-located links like I do for my own stories. I think this is sorta borderline for a SciScoop science story, but it IS about computers and it IS kinda interesting. Thanks for submitting it, AH – please submit more stories and more often!
….The above description [see first paragraph link] of a corrupt voting system is not the result of an overactive imagination. Rather it is the result of a extensive research by computer programmers and journalists working around the globe. Principally it is the work of investigative journalist Bev Harris, author of the soon to be published book “Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering In The 21st Century.” And most important of all, it is the result of research focussed on investigating the actual software distributed by one of the largest voting systems companies operating in the recent U.S. Elections.
CAVEAT: It is important to note that the research into this subject has not established that the files we have been working on were in fact in situ in County Election Supervisors’ offices at the last election nor have we proof that the back door we have discovered – which might enable the rigging of elections – was actually used in any recent election. However, it is the considered opinion of all those involved in this investigation that it is not up to us as journalists or programmers to prove that elections were rigged; rather it is a responsibility of the electoral system itself to prove its integrity.
In the course of investigating the issue of the integrity of new electronic voting machines, Bev Harris learned that people around the world had been downloading from an open FTP site belonging to Diebold Election Systems, one of the leading manufacturers of voting systems. This website contained several gigabytes of files including manuals, source codes, and installation versions of numerous parts of the Diebold voting system, and of its vote counting program GEMS. Realizing we had stumbled across what might be the equivalent of the Pentagon Papers for elections, the full contents of this website have been secured around the world at several locations. The original website was itself taken down on January 29th 2003. We can now reveal for the first time the location of a complete online copy of the original data set. As we anticipate attempts to prevent the distribution of this information, we encourage supporters of democracy to make copies of these files and to make them available on websites and file sharing networks.
The Risks Forum has had long discussions about the requirements for electronic voting systems and tamperproof elections. The important thing is having a physical (usually paper) trail for auditing purposes – and you need to think about how it’s done carefully to ensure validity while maintaining anonymity. Here’s a link to one comment on this.
The above description [see first paragraph link] of a corrupt voting system is not the result of an overactive imagination. Rather it is the result of a extensive research by computer programmers and journalists working around the globe.
Well, a “corrupt voting system” needs to be shown to have been corrupted. Incompetence at making a reliable and secure voting system does not make it corrupt unless someone has used its weaknesses.
And the “extensive research” published only shows there is unprotected data which can be accessed directly. There are numerous pleas for study of the discovered code — until someone truly does “extensive research” of that code and understands what it does, guessing as to what it does and guessing at the meaning of file names…is just guessing and wishful thinking. (If I could be paid, I could understand it in short order. But I don’t have time to volunteer.)
sorry, but it doesn’t work that way.
an electoral system must be demonstrably solid and transparent from the get-go — clearly, any POTENTIAL for corruption should be eliminated before the vote takes place.
what’s more, the system has to be properly auditable, with some sort of paper trail at every level.
it would also help if the company assigned to manage it *wasn’t* a serious contributor to any political party — go to http://opensecrets.org , use “Diebold” as a search phrase, and you’ll see what i mean.
The fact that the voting system is inherently corruptible doesn’t concern you?
Why is it only a problem if fraud has already been perpetrated? Isn’t a clearly demonstrated potential for fraud — in and of itself — a major cause for concern?
Read this article:
San Jose Mercury Column
Then tell me where you disagree with it.
I’m waiting.
check this comment at
nogeorgebush
I thought this was funny…
why vote for a person who cannot speak a sentence in english. 4 more of years of what agony…listening to him construct his sentences..no child left behind..I’d say “bush got left behind”