Diesle
September 14, 2003, 12:02 AM
What is BBV and why should I care...?
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/access-diebold.htm\
Analysis of an Electronic Voting System - Professional SecurityAnalysis of BBV A MUST READ... "Using publicly available source code, we performed an analysis of a voting machine. This code was apparently developed by a company that sells to states and other municipalities that use them in real elections. We found significant security flaws: voters can trivially cast multiple ballots with no built-in traceability, administrative functions can be performed by regular voters, and the threats posed by insiders such as poll workers, software developers, and even janitors, is even greater. Based on our analysis of the development environment, including change logs and comments, we believe that an appropriate level of programming discipline for a project such as this was not maintained. In fact, there appears to have been little quality control in the process."
"The model where individual vendors write proprietary code to run our elections appears to be unreliable,and if we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate. We owe it to ourselves and to our future to have robust, well-designed election systems to preserve the bedrock of our democracy.
Note--- You can infer from the last statement that OPEN SOURCE may be the only acceptable way to create this exceptionally sensative piece of software. Or, that it simply is not humanly possible to create a system that would be 'safe enough'
http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf
Power Point Presentation of Security for the GEMS system. How the maker Diebold thinks its secured.
http://elections.kennesaw.edu/services/gems_and_securityv2.ppt
Activism in action. Jim March looking to 'dig deeper' post election...
http://www.equalccw.com/alamedafollowup.pdf
Professional Security Analysis of the Deibold product as requested by the State of Georgia. And I quote "Summary: In conclusion, we recognize that there is no such thing as a 100 % secure computer system. Yet we are willing to fly on airplanes that are controlled by computers. We allow a heart-lung machine controlled by a computer to monitor and control the vital functions of our body during an operation. In many phases of our lives we are willing to submit to various computer controlled situations. Why should we not extend the same level of confidence to our voting systems.
We do not pretend that the security features described above make the State's voting system completely safe from attack. We do believe, however, that these features reduce the chance of a successful election fraud in the State of Georgia to better than one in one billion."
This is an absurd and abstract finding. Whos paying this chump? Oh ya.....
http://www.votescount.com/georgia.pdf
Article
http://www.thetip.org/art_Electronic_Voting_Machines_Blasted_by_Scientists__Hacked_by_Author_469_icle.html
REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE (WA.) ON THE EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION OF AN DIRECT RECORDING ELECTRONIC VOTE TALLYING SYSTEM. Guess what, they like it and want to use it...
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/diebold_votingsystem.pdf
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do your homewok on this one...
Diesle
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/access-diebold.htm\
Analysis of an Electronic Voting System - Professional SecurityAnalysis of BBV A MUST READ... "Using publicly available source code, we performed an analysis of a voting machine. This code was apparently developed by a company that sells to states and other municipalities that use them in real elections. We found significant security flaws: voters can trivially cast multiple ballots with no built-in traceability, administrative functions can be performed by regular voters, and the threats posed by insiders such as poll workers, software developers, and even janitors, is even greater. Based on our analysis of the development environment, including change logs and comments, we believe that an appropriate level of programming discipline for a project such as this was not maintained. In fact, there appears to have been little quality control in the process."
"The model where individual vendors write proprietary code to run our elections appears to be unreliable,and if we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate. We owe it to ourselves and to our future to have robust, well-designed election systems to preserve the bedrock of our democracy.
Note--- You can infer from the last statement that OPEN SOURCE may be the only acceptable way to create this exceptionally sensative piece of software. Or, that it simply is not humanly possible to create a system that would be 'safe enough'
http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf
Power Point Presentation of Security for the GEMS system. How the maker Diebold thinks its secured.
http://elections.kennesaw.edu/services/gems_and_securityv2.ppt
Activism in action. Jim March looking to 'dig deeper' post election...
http://www.equalccw.com/alamedafollowup.pdf
Professional Security Analysis of the Deibold product as requested by the State of Georgia. And I quote "Summary: In conclusion, we recognize that there is no such thing as a 100 % secure computer system. Yet we are willing to fly on airplanes that are controlled by computers. We allow a heart-lung machine controlled by a computer to monitor and control the vital functions of our body during an operation. In many phases of our lives we are willing to submit to various computer controlled situations. Why should we not extend the same level of confidence to our voting systems.
We do not pretend that the security features described above make the State's voting system completely safe from attack. We do believe, however, that these features reduce the chance of a successful election fraud in the State of Georgia to better than one in one billion."
This is an absurd and abstract finding. Whos paying this chump? Oh ya.....
http://www.votescount.com/georgia.pdf
Article
http://www.thetip.org/art_Electronic_Voting_Machines_Blasted_by_Scientists__Hacked_by_Author_469_icle.html
REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE (WA.) ON THE EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION OF AN DIRECT RECORDING ELECTRONIC VOTE TALLYING SYSTEM. Guess what, they like it and want to use it...
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/diebold_votingsystem.pdf
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do your homewok on this one...
Diesle