Voting Machine 100% Insecure

[Ren]

SLOT88KU : Situs Games Daring Terbaik dan Terpercaya di Indonesia

PRESS RELEASE – JULY 31, 2006.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Subject: WORST EVER SECURITY FLAW FOUND IN DIEBOLD TS VOTING MACHINE
Contact: Alan Dechert
Reference: PICTURES
(Click on thumbnail. Click again on lower half of picture for high resolution)

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA – ?This may be the worst security flaw we have seen in touch screen voting machines,? says Open Voting Foundation president, Alan Dechert. Upon examining the inner workings of one of the most popular paperless touch screen voting machines used in public elections in the United States, it has been determined that with the flip of a single switch inside, the machine can behave in a completely different manner compared to the tested and certified version.

?Diebold has made the testing and certification process practically irrelevant,? according to Dechert. ?If you have access to these machines and you want to rig an election, anything is possible with the Diebold TS – and it could be done without leaving a trace. All you need is a screwdriver.? This model does not produce a voter verified paper trail so there is no way to check if the voter?s choices are accurately reflected in the tabulation.

Open Voting Foundation is releasing 22 high-resolution close up pictures of the system. This picture, in particular, shows a ?BOOT AREA CONFIGURATION? chart painted on the system board.

The most serious issue is the ability to choose between “EPROM” and “FLASH” boot configurations. Both of these memory sources are present. All of the switches in question (JP2, JP3, JP8, SW2 and SW4) are physically present on the board. It is clear that this system can ship with live boot profiles in two locations, and switching back and forth could change literally everything regarding how the machine works and counts votes. This could be done before or after the so-called “Logic And Accuracy Tests”.

A third possible profile could be field-added in minutes and selected in the “external flash” memory location, the interface for which is present on the motherboard.

This is not a minor variation from the previously documented attack point on the newer Diebold TSx. To its credit, the TSx can only contain one boot profile at a time. Diebold has ensured that it is extremely difficult to confirm what code is in a TSx (or TS) at any one time but it is at least theoretically possible to do so. But in the TS, a completely legal and certified set of files can be instantly overridden and illegal uncertified code be made dominant in the system, and then this situation can be reversed leaving the legal code dominant again in a matter of minutes.

?These findings underscore the need for open testing and certification. There is no way such a security vulnerability should be allowed. These systems should be recalled?

OPEN VOTING FOUNDATION is a nonprofit non stock California corporation dedicated to demonstrating the need for and benefits of voting technology that can be publicly scrutinized.

Yup, so glad we are using these now…

[The_Rabbi]

I am against all electronic voting, and I hate socialism or other ‘left’ ideals(just so you don’t think I’m hating on the Republicans instead of considering the issue.) What can be utilized nefariously by one party can just as easily be taken advantage of by another as soon as they gain the power. Better that we never take the first step down that road.

[Albertabeef]

This reminds me of that joke about the Americans spending millions of dollars to develop a pen that could write in zero gravity while the Russians used a grease-pencil.

Everybody’s been screwed over by and knows how unreliable a simple multiple-choice scantron test is. Why would anyone in their right mind trust an election to voting machines?

It’s not that fucking hard. People put an “X” in the circle beside the candidate of their choice. Then you count them. What a fucking concept.

Beef

[Marmadogg]

The Aussies use an open source voting machine for all the elections in their country.

http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,61045,00.html

If the Democrats can run elections in key states like FL and OH we are all F’ed!

[rainjack]

[quote]AlbertaBeef wrote:
This reminds me of that joke about the Americans spending millions of dollars to develop a pen that could write in zero gravity while the Russians used a grease-pencil.

Everybody’s been screwed over by and knows how unreliable a simple multiple-choice scantron test is. Why would anyone in their right mind trust an election to voting machines?

It’s not that fucking hard. People put an “X” in the circle beside the candidate of their choice. Then you count them. What a fucking concept.

Beef[/quote]

Evidently you didn’t follow, or were not old enough to follow the saga that was Florida in November 2000. that is where the whole “we have to trust technology” thing came from.

Now the same dumbasses theat were throwing hissy fits for electronic voting machines just 6 years ago are already setting the stage for “voter fraud” withthe electronic machines, and calling them unsafe.

Classic liberal bullshit.

[Albertabeef]

Well I don’t have any reason to follow Floridian politics any more than you’d have to follow the politics of British Columbia.

[rainjack]

[quote]AlbertaBeef wrote:
Well I don’t have any reason to follow Floridian politics any more than you’d have to follow the politics of British Columbia.[/quote]

Yet you are offering your opinion here as if you know what you re talking about.

Children should be seen and not heard.

[ShaunW]

/Aussies use election machines/
no we don’t - the ACT did in it’s state election, but all federal elections and all /but one/ state elections are done on paper - which are put in a box - then a whole bunch of people count the marks on the bits of paper.

It works for 20-odd million of us, why not 300-odd million of you?

got to admit tho, open source machines might make the process quicker (if you get to you local election boothe in the middle of the day, you can be standing in line for over an hr! - sigh - the price of enforced democracy.