Stunning doc shows Diebold hid security & operations flaws from MD & country; Lamone knew

[Amaryllis]

Rebecca Abrahams


The Two Faces of Diebold

Stunning Document Surfaces to Show That America's #1 Voting Machine Manufacturer Hides Security and Operation Flaws from The State of Maryland and the Country

In September, 2003 Linda Lamone, the Administrator of Maryland's State Board of Elections and President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) hands over a critical study on the security of the Diebold Election Systems machines that count all of Maryland's votes.

Between the time that the State of Maryland commissioned the highly respected Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to evaluate the effectiveness and security of their electronic voting machines and the time that the study is made public, critical pieces of information have been edited, omitted and, in some cases words added, to fundamentally alter the original meaning of the report's conclusions.

<snip>

It is a seamy world of secrecy, proprietary software, partisan executives "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President", politicians asking programmers to design software to flip vote totals, and lots and lots of money.

<snip>

What makes this SAIC report, called "The Pentagon Papers of Electronic Voting" by some computer experts, so important is that:

1. It shows, in black and white, that what Diebold says to election officials and voters across the country is not the truth.

2. It shows that there are virtually no security protocols in place for certain Diebold machines and that the recommended security protocols were purposely removed.

3. It shows that the analyzed Diebold machines were not functional nor secure for use in elections and raises serious doubts that they are ready for the November 7, 2006 Midterm elections.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-abrahams/the-two-faces-of-diebold_b_33138.html

[MissWaverly]

1. Can we get a refund of our 143 million dollars here in Maryland

Oh, Bob, you are running again for gov. stumping on your concern for the state, ah,
could you get a refund for us on this, we were conned into thinking we had an operational
system when it was just lights and wires in a box. What is the phrase, something like
breach of contract, product not as advertised, oh, I am sure some of your legal
experts can say it better than I can, we were conned, that's my spin.

[Amaryllis]

2. intent to defraud?

[MissWaverly]

5. Yes, that's the ticket

sounds like a good legal case to me.

[hootinholler]

11. Yeah but didn't Bob call for paper ballots?

I though it was our loverly state senate that put the kibosh on the bill.

Ms Lemon, I can't figure out.

-Hoot

[MissWaverly]

12. Yes that's right HOOT, Miss Lemon aka Lamone very funny

but who's to say he could have got all the mileage of a public statement for paper ballots
while he was twisting arms in the state senate to continue with Diebold, I must admit that I
don't trust Gov. No Slots very much. And he didn't do any arm twisting to get any refund
for the money paid for this repeated failure. Also about your war crimes resolution, try
again after Tuesday, it's still a good idea. There has to be accountability, I remember
when my folks talked about the Nazis, the words never again, were quick to follow, that's
what we need, we need to make it very clear, that this stuff is not acceptable, it is
not business as usual and that it is not allowed.

:-)

[hootinholler]

13. I'll probably send the signatures to congress.

I wrote that in July after the Hamadan decision.

I agree BE is sleazy but could he twist arms quietly? I don't doubt he would if he could, but I think someone would have yelped.

-Hoot

[MissWaverly]

15. well, Hoot, I heard they count every signature as a 100

it's like the polls, so send it the Conyers,

:-)

[BootinUp]

3. Why is it stunning?

They wanted to sell machines, lying in this country happens every fucking day to make a buck.

[Stevepol]

4. I hope this info finds its way to RFK Jr and his law firm.

[MissWaverly]

6. yes, me too

I am tired of the cost of these machines goes up and up and their reliability goes consistently down, I voted in the primary this year, it was worse than 2004.
I think that it costs 1 million dollars just to store them between elections.

[ellenfl]

7. most importantly . . .

Nonetheless, absent the ability to properly inspect the software on these machines, the best safeguard may, indeed, be for everyone to vote. The larger the turnout and, conceivably, the larger the margin of victory, one way or another, the less likely these far from proven machines will be able to alter the vote in defiance of the exit polling.

this is what we need to do. then we need to stay on 'fixing' these machines. if the states have to buy these machines then all the codes should be the property of the state owners. maybe that's what we should work on next. the states could then get their universities to create reliable machines. it's unconscionable that private companies have proprietary control of the code that counts our elections.

ion sancho is making modifications to his machines that will literally lock out anyone trying to change results. that's a great start.

ellen fl

[MissWaverly]

8. Hey, I will be at that polls on Tuesday, believe me

[ellenfl]

9. i believe you. so will i. eom

[MissWaverly]

10. thank you, let's all think blue, and be positive

:-)

[Amaryllis]

14. Brad has a post on this with more details:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3719#more-3719