Our worst fears: Vote Tampering (tags)
By entering a 2-digit code in a hidden location, a second set of votes is created in the Diebold central tabulator, a program installed in 1,000 locations, which controls both paper ballots and touch-screens, each system handling up to a million votes at a time. Full story After invoking the 2-digit trigger, this second set of votes can be changed so that it no longer matches the correct set of votes. The voting system will then read the totals from the bogus vote set. It takes only seconds to change the votes, and to date not a single location in the U.S. has implemented security measures to fully mitigate the risks. It is not too late to do so, and the corrective measures are relatively simple. This program is not "stupidity" or sloppiness. It was designed and tested over a series of a dozen version adjustments, and has been in place for four years.
Was the CA March 2nd Primary Hacked by an E-Voting Manufacturer? (tags)
Was the CA March 2nd Primary Hacked by an E-Voting Manufacturer? At the very bottom is a list of CA Senators and other election officials; for anyone interested in a fair election please contact them and demand that the following allegations be thoroughly investigated and the election officials responsible be held accountable. From www.blackboxvoting.org Wednesday April 1, 2004 Money, Access, and Stunning Security Flaws — A Poor Recipe for Fair Elections — By Bev Harris, Tuesday March 31 2004 * * * * * Section 18575 of the California Elections Code makes it illegal for anyone other than an election officer to handle, count, or canvass ballots: Every person is guilty of a felony, and on conviction shall be punished by imprisnment in the state prison for two, three or four years, who at any election: (a) without first having been appointed and qualified, acts as an election officer, (b) not being an election officer, performs or discharges any of the duties of an election officer in regard to the handling, counting, or canvassing of any ballts. This section provides that only authorized people, such as an election officer, may count votes. To the extent that an unauthorized person handles or counts votes, he or she is in violation of section 18575. * * * * * In Riverside County, California, I recently participated in the videotaping a statement that causes me concern. On election night, March 2, two people who do not work for the County, Sequoia employees Michael Frontera and Eddie Campbell were observed to access the WinEds central tabulator during the middle of the count. At this time, approximately 8:50 on election night, about one-third of Riverside's 157 precincts had been counted. At that point, the count was such that an automatic runoff would have been required between Linda Soubirous, a candidate for County Supervisor, and her opponent, Bob Buster. In the central count room of Riverside County at this time, no vote tabulation activity appeared to be going on. Two men were at the central tabulation terminals, the computers that add up all the votes from precincts around the county. Sequoia employee Michael Frontera was sitting at central tabulator terminal typing into the program, and Sequoia employee Eddie Campbell was standing next to him talking to him.