• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Topic: Do you need proof that e-voting is open to fraud?

  1. #1

    Do you need proof that e-voting is open to fraud?

    sponsored links

    From Black Box Voting...

    Wed. December 14, 2005: Due to contractual non-performance and security design issues, Leon County (Florida) supervisor of elections Ion Sancho has announced that he will never again use Diebold in an election. He has requested funds to replace the Diebold system from the county. On Tuesday, the most serious “hack” demonstration to date took place in Leon County. The Diebold machines succumbed quickly to alteration of the votes. This comes on the heels of the resignation of Diebold CEO Wally O'Dell, and the announcement that a stockholder's class action suit has been filed against Diebold by Stull, Stull & Brady and another firm, Scott & Scott. Further “hack” testing on additional vulnerabilities is tentatively scheduled before Christmas in the state of California.

    Finnish security expert Harri Hursti, together with Black Box Voting, demonstrated that Diebold made misrepresentations to Secretaries of State across the nation when Diebold claimed votes could not be changed on the “memory card” (the credit-card-sized ballot box used by computerized voting machines.

    A test election was run in Leon County on Tuesday with a total of eight ballots. Six ballots voted "no" on a ballot question as to whether Diebold voting machines can be hacked or not. Two ballots, cast by Dr. Herbert Thompson and by Harri Hursti voted "yes" indicating a belief that the Diebold machines could be hacked.

    At the beginning of the test election the memory card programmed by Harri Hursti was inserted into an Optical Scan Diebold voting machine. A "zero report" was run indicating zero votes on the memory card. In fact, however, Hursti had pre-loaded the memory card with plus and minus votes.

    The eight ballots were run through the optical scan machine. The standard Diebold-supplied "ender card" was run through as is normal procedure ending the election. A results tape was run from the voting machine.

    Correct results should have been: Yes:2 ; No:6

    However, just as Hursti had planned, the results tape read: Yes:7 ; No:1

    The results were then uploaded from the optical scan voting machine into the GEMS central tabulator, a step cited by Diebold as a protection against memory card hacking. The central tabulator is the "mother ship" that pulls in all votes from voting machines. However, the GEMS central tabulator failed to notice that the voting machines had been hacked.
    The results in the central tabulator read:

    Yes:7 ; No:1

    This videotaped testing session was witnessed by Black Box Voting investigators Bev Harris and Kathleen Wynne, Florida Fair Elections Coalition Director Susan Pynchon, security expert Dr. Herbert Thompson, and Susan Bernecker, a former candidate for New Orleans city council who videotaped Sequoia-brand touch-screen voting machines in her district recording vote after vote for the wrong candidate...


    Have votes been hacked? That's open to conjecture. But with the value of a general election worth many billions of dollars, and personal convictions high, it's difficult to imagine that everybody involved would play nicey-nicey. Leave the vault open long enough and somebody's going to take it.

    Okay, the hack is proven, the CEO resigns and a class action lawsuit has been filed. Let see if the mass media is brave enough to touch this one.


  2. #2

    Re: Do you need proof that e-voting is open to fraud?

    This technique is similar to the old votescam with some of the old mechanical machines. These include a mechanical "odometer" that shows the tallies for each candidate on that machine.

    So how do I beat Ern in an election? I preset my vote count to 900 and leave Ern's at 0. I then apply a sticker over the number nine that reads as a zero. The vote watchers inspect the machine and see that it reads zero for both candidates at the start of the race.

    For my first 99 votes the tally is accurate. As soon as I get my one hundredth vote, I zoom up to 1,000 votes. Try to catch me now Ern!

    Sure, on my 1,000th vote, it's a fair election again, but as of my 1,100th vote, the tally shows that I have 2,000.

    The bottom line is that I have one in ten odds of getting an extra 900 votes. If I know roughly how many votes are likely to be made for me on that machine, I can really stack the odds in my favor.

    I read about this trick in Votescam, which was written years before Election 2000.

    The difference with the Diebold Hack is that the odds of me beating Ern in the election is 100%. Woo hoo!

    I'm proud to accept victory in this election, and I'd like to thank Ern for running a tough, but fair and respectful campaign. I'd also like to thank my staff and our canvassers for getting out the vote. With a winning margin of only a few hundred, every vote really counted.


  3. #3

    Re: Do you need proof that e-voting is open to fraud?

    It's no coincidence that the Bush admin wanted them installed everywhere and that the Diebold company was in tight with the Bushies.

    Oh man nothing I love better than a fraud totally falling apart in public.

    Gee, honesty? Heard of it but never seen it.

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts