From BradBlog: Two (new) articles on E-Voting fraud

[Carolab]

http://www.dailyrepublic.com/articles/2005/10/07/opinion_columnists/opinloguerico.txt

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-5891237.html

[texpatriot2004]

1. Thanks for these new articles about E-Voting. n/t

[kster]

2. Thank you carolab

now if only we can keep them going!

[Stevepol]

3. Great articles. Needs to be on Greatest Page. Recommend!!

[Chi]

4. Thanks...and Recommended 8) .. n/t

[kster]

5. Recco this...nt

[nashville_brook]

6. from one of the articles: E-voting fraud is an American issue

thought i'd post some yummy tidbits from the articles:

http://www.dailyrepublic.com/articles/2005/10/07/opinion_columnists/opinloguerico.txt

I've accumulated a mountain of studies and reports on Diebold's electronic voting machines since I wrote the Dieb-Throat columns, all pointing to the same conclusion: The software can be hacked - undetected - relatively easily by someone with the technology skills. I also received a ”rebuttal“ study done by the Caltech/Massachusetts Institute of Technology denying this conclusion, a sentiment echoed in a letter written by Diebold's president. It's become a case of software ”he said, she said.“ I'm not a software engineer. I won't even pretend to understand the software analyses littering my desktop.

I'm also not a mathematician, so I won't pretend to understand the detailed statistical study regarding the discrepancy between the exit polls and final tallies in the 2004 Presidential race. However, I understood this paragraph regarding that study just fine: ”The findings of the analysis are telling and thought provoking: In 40 states, the actual election results turned out to be more favorable to Mr. Bush than the exit polls. The probability of such discrepancies occurring by chance is less than one in 10 million.“

and further down:

This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an American issue. We must love our country more than we love our political parties or America is doomed.

good stuff! thanks Carolab!

[nashville_brook]

7. from zdnet -- Panel: E-voting vulnerable

GAITHERSBURG, Md.--Overlooked bugs and malicious code pose a plausible threat to software on electronic voting machines, a panel of election experts said Friday.

At a conference held by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, part of the U.S. Commerce Department, election officials, computer scientists and academics weighed in on steps that should be taken before, during and after elections to protect the voting systems against software-related problems. Voting has gone increasingly electronic during the past couple of election cycles, but the devices remain without national, uniform security standards.

(snip)

Some panelists imagined scenarios in which attackers posing as voters could slip corrupted "smart cards" into electronic voting machines that rely on such media or use a "signal"--say, a series of touch screen presses--that would trigger the software to swap votes to another candidate.

They also expressed concern that, if voting machines were hooked up to wireless signals, someone could sit outside the warehouse where the machines were stored--or simply use a PDA inside the polling place--to transmit malicious software to the voting machines.
The solution? Design the systems with as few additional frills as possible. "I don't know if I'm going out on a limb on this, but wireless and voting do not mix," Shamos said, drawing applause from the audience.

_______________________________

paper ballots. good old fashioned techonology. it's not beyond human ability to COUNT.