Here is another reason why many Americans don’t trust electronic voting machines: Hackers hired by the state of California were able to break into electronic voting systems used in California and found several ways in which vote totals could potentially be altered, the New York Times reported. The U.S. House has been working on a bill that would require every state to have a paper trail that so that voters could verify that their ballots had been correctly cast and that could be used during recounts, as is already the case in Sedgwick County. But critics contend that paper backups aren’t enough to address all the security concerns.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- lindainks55 on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- Franklin on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- cosmos_originally on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Franklin on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- BlueJay on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Regular on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Franklin on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- Monkeyhawk on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- lindainks55 on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
61 Comments
In Kansas they use standard password entry. They should be using encrypted key entry systems instead.They can be changed as often as the Election office needs.
They should also have locked formulas in their database. If they leave sum total formulas unlocked it would be easy to change the totals once entry is gained.
Before the the last two presidential elections the owner of Diebold Election Systems told the republicians he could guarantee they would win.
He knew he could fix the election and no one would do anything about it.
I saw a documentary a while back of people testing supposedly “secure” voting machines in Florida.
They took four chips from machines at random and made them available to experts. Then they conducted a mock election consisting of 12 voters. We saw six people vote “Aye” and six people vote “Nay.” The machines were tabulated and the count came out 8 to 4.
A Paper Trail for voting machines seems like a no-brainer. Josef Stalin said, “It doesn’t matter who votes. What matters is who counts the votes.”
Who cares? Unless another Bush is run by the Cheney oil&gas industry, that is.
If your side looses, you can claim the voter machines are not secured.
You can still pull the old tricks out of the bag, such as dead people voting, voting more than once, illegal aliens or non-citizens voting, ex-convict voting and so on.
I just want to take this opportunity to say what an idiot I think Walt Chappell is for challenging our voting system here in the county when there was NO evidence for him to do so!!! I hear he wants to run again, and I hope the Democrats find him a primary challenger!!
Yes, yes, yes. GET A PAPER TRAIL!!!!
I more than suspect that the stories of rampant vote fraud in the last presidential election are little more than tin-foil conspiracy; after all, it’s a convenient scapegoat to blame the “fixers” rather than admit the public elected who they elected.(and no, I’m not gonna spend the rest of the thread re-hashing the latest conspiracy theory ad nauseum).
HOWEVER - perception is everything. Even if the machines ARE secure (and I’m not convinced they are), the PERCEPTION that elections are less than kosher is incredibly damaging. There is a history in America of vote-fixing (primarily by the old Democratic machines a la Daley), so “trust us” isn’t good enough.
Put the security in place, and get a paper trail.
Even with a paper trail, there will be problems with either side crying foul. What has changed since 1994 is the way politicians have been governing.
The Christian Conservative Republicans who took power in 1994 ran roughshod over everyone else and they were downright vicious. They spent millions investigating Bill Clinton and the only thing they came up with was a BJ. And let’s not forget that while Newt and his boys were pointing their fingers at Bill Clinton, they themselves were messing around with their own mistresses. The majority of the voters saw this and called it as they saw it - hypocrisy.
Then along comes George W. Bush and his infamous Florida election. Is it any wonder the average voter questions the process of counting the votes? I think not.
Bush stated after winning the presidency that he was a uniter, not a divider. Well 6 years later we have seen Bush’s version of uniting. We are more polarized now than ever before. If you don’t believe that - just read through any of these blogs about Bush.
Y’all are blind. Why is Diebold’s source code protected by law. It is a scripting language. It tallies up votes. Nothing proprietary there. But should allegations be made that the voting system is flawed, no one – NO ONE – is authorized to view the code of a machine used unless they are a Diebold employee.
Why is that? A script language that tallies votes. This isn’t rocket science and the same type of code can be found all over the net.
The tallying software. Too easy to manipulate the data. Too many people have access to that data. No, for this one you would need someone dirty at the polling site. But still something to think about.
Punch cards. Best way to cast a vote. If there is a problem, easy to human recount. Don’t trust the electronic voting or tallying machines.
Check out Hacking Democracy. Serioulsy.
Is there anyone who trusts that our voting machines are secure? This isn’t an issue where we take sides according to our political leanings; we all want to be sure our vote is counted accurately. Technology has increased our unease. We get the results more quickly but that isn’t important when we question whether those results are accurate. Seems to be one subject we could come together on and as Americans demand it be fixed now - not later, now. Let’s do it together.
Diebold is on the ’side’ that pays the most. Dirty as the day is long.
I know this is an old article, but I think this is the REAL reason Chuck Hagel suddenly put the stop on his presidential “ambitions”.
Too much dirt about him OWNING a voting machine company. Oh, and BTW, that “voting machine company” was the ONLY one counting the votes in Hagel’s race. Talk about something not passing the “smell” test.
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html
There should never be tricks in playing with the elections from EITHER side. I’m extremely worried about the vote machines and the counting of ballots and the trick wording or placement of questions on the ballots.
I only vote by paper till they fix this mess.
CF2K will NEVER, EVER vote electronically. EVER. Paper ballots only.
As for “Not a Walt Fan” (Brenda Landwehr, perhaps?) posting upthread, well, Landwehr pulled some really sleazy shit in the election that has not and will not be aired publicly. The numbers were weird and definitely warranted a closer look.
Yes, Linda, this is one that we ALL agree on. Elections MUST be secure and trustworthy; we must have confidence that the votes cast are the votes counted. Even the perception that is not the case is damaging.
GET A PAPER TRAIL!!!
Electronic voting machines can be rigged. The old pull the lever could also, according to a documentary I saw one. BOxes for paper ballots can be stuffed. THen thier is the hanging chad, the almost through chad, and on and on.Any election, no matter the method, can be rigged. Dead people vote, felons don;t vote, people misidentified as felons can;t vote. illegals vote, on and on and on. Peopple can find any reason they lost an election, especially a close one. There are no easy answers.
Perhaps we can have a vote in triplicate setup. Once by electronic machine, once by paper ballot, and once by the old lever pulling system. If the totals don;t match, that precinct is either left out of the vote total, or averaged (your choice). any takers. Oh, and you must have a photo id, provided free by the state, in order to vote. and you must be registered to vote in that precinct at least 30 days in advance, having provided at least 2 forms of identification while regisgtering.
Sounds like a lot, but with all the fingerpointing, and all the mistrust, we must do something to not only insure a free and fair election, without fraud, but relieve even the appearance of impropriety.
By the way, I hate voting machines. Don;t worry as much about fraud, as just pure fup. They are after all, only machines.
As for “Not a Walt Fan” (Brenda Landwehr, perhaps?) posting upthread, well, Landwehr pulled some really sleazy shit in the election that has not and will not be aired publicly. The numbers were weird and definitely warranted a closer look.
Care to tell us what Brenda did? I’m not doubting you, she can’t be trusted in my opinion but if you’re going to allege something is fact, you need to support it.
As for who will run against Brenda in 2008, the best thing that could happen to her would be for Walt to run again. He’ll run another ineffective campaign telling voters he knows better than they do about EVERYTHING and she will again slide to victory.
If you don’t trust voting machines, use provisional ballots.
They are readily available at the Election office.
This is Walt Chappell. During the 8 hours allotted by the Court to confirm the over 4,400 votes cast on electronic voting machines, the 3 recount inspectors were only able to verify that the paper printouts matched the data on the flash drives. Nothing more!!
Prior to the election, Brenda Landwehr paid $1,000 to a computer expert whose specialty is programming touch screens to take selections made on a screen and record that data. So, without access to the source codes or the software loaded onto the voting machines used at Legislative District 91 polling sites, the inspectors did NOT CONFIRM for which candidate each voter actually chose on their touch screen. The small paper rolls in these machines are internal and coded so most voters have no idea for which candidate their vote was actually recorded. Nor did the recount.
Why would Brenda Landwehr go to such expense to hire this touch screen expert then spend thousands of dollars on an attorney to fight the vote recount? What does she have to hide???
Computer security experts all over the USA propose that each voter mark their votes on a scannable, paper ballot. Then, if a recount is needed in a close race like this, there is a verifiable paper trail without easily hacked, touch screen computer software between the voter and the printout.
There is now a bill in Congress sponsored by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) which is called the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007. It is co-sponsored by over 200 other representatives from both parties. The Holt bill requires a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast in America.
The foundation of any Democracy is that each vote will be counted as cast. Touch screen voting machines have been shown by the National Science Foundation and computer experts across America to be unreliable and easily hacked. In my race, I was ahead in paper ballot votes cast yet “lost” late in the evening by only 188 votes on the machine cast ballots. The same thing happened in 4 other legislative races and the Governor’s race in Sedgwick County where Sebelius only received 48% of the machine cast votes. Landwehr is close friends with each of the Republican candidates in these questionable races. Was her hired computer expert used in these elections as well?
By not accepting PAC or lobbyists money to fund my campaign, and standing up for integrity in the vote counting process, I am simply saying that we need elected officials who actually represent the people and not the special interests. If we can not trust election results, then we can not trust that “We The People” are truly being represented. Back door deals with lobbyists, loss of voter confidence and getting citizens to actually vote is destroying our Democracy.
You may call me at (316) 838-7900 or send an email to ChappellHQ@Chappell4KSRep.com if you wish to get more information on this important issue. I thank the Eagle for raising this vital question and providing Blog space for dialogue.
D91:
I analyzed the Landwehr v Chappell numbers very carefully. I’m also very familiar with the kind of “campaign” Chappell supposedly “ran.” There’s nothing odd about the numbers at all.
Chappell ran a terrible campaign, completely ignoring the advice of professionals who know how campaigns are supposed to be run. In a race where the incumbent is was incredibly vulnerable, it was Chappell’s race to lose, and he lost it.
Walt Chappel
I do not know you, I ddidn;t vote in your election, but I can tell that you are full of it. How? By first making allegations somebody rigged the election, and then sayingI am simply saying that we need elected officials who actually represent the people and not the special interests”
No, you accused someone of voter fraud. I suspect you lost because, well, you lost. Get over it, and yourself”
Why is diebold’s source code protected by law?
I could easily write code that if you vote for candidate ‘A’ on this date, the code records a vote for Candidate ‘B’ and even prints you out a nice receipt showing you voted for candidate ‘A’ .
Now the next day, should there be an investigation, the code notes the date and votes correctly. Without access to the source code, investigation is fruitless.
On the tallying side, the memory cards are inserted into the tallying machine. I can reprogram the memory card to read whatever I want. Now the ‘tallies’ are all tallied up like I want them to be and the memory cards – to be stored for later review – reflect what I want them to.
The long and short of it, if you don’t have access to the source code for review, the code can do what ever it is programmed to do – clean or dirty.
Isn’t it odd that diebold would have their source code protected by law? A scripting language that records and tallies votes. Hardly rocket science. Hardly proprietary. But yet they felt the need to protect the code.
If there is a god, brenda “tabor” landwehr will be gone gone, just like bon bon after the election.
Now if you can get her to follow the demise of bon bon, AND get susan “I own bingo parlours but you cant vote on gambling” wagle voted out…
… you would be well on the way to cleaning up the wichita delegation by ousting the kansas koulter girls.
And if there is a god? jan pauls would be gone too. Along with mark gilstrap and candy ruff.
And as for little timmy huelskamp, they phucking DESERVE him in the hinterlands of the snake handlers in southwest kansas. PLEASE keep him around as a reminder of why we should NOT confuse politics with religion.
And you know, if little timmy pursued salvation HALF as hard as he seeks political power, he’d be a priest instead of a two bit loser.
I think, in fact, he IS an honorary coulter girl.
“Isn’t it odd that diebold would have their source code protected by law?”
I would think so, but if it was public, would it not be possible for some local chump to break into where the machjines, or memory is stored, and reprogram them, if that it is that easy? I don;t know. I am not a programmer. Last program I did was in fortran, by card, in 1980. I am just supplying a possible, and I don’t even know plausible, or reasonable, answer
Mr. Chappell -
Those are some BIG allegations just made. But I don’t see any proof, only your conjecture.
I want Brenda gone. She does not represent the district, but I won’t be voting for you next year. I don’t want another poilico in that job who makes allegations without facts and reacts based on conjecture.
I didn’t want to vote for you in 2006 but you were the “lesser of two evils.”
You ran a bad campaign, from what I could tell based on what I was getting in my mail box and at my door, and now I hear you didn’t listen to those with expertise in the area (See the post from “Tom”) and I’m not surprised.
To now come in and latch onto a REAL problem and blame it for why your campaign was not successful is just pathetic.
The machines can be locked down. The only thing available is the voting application.
I am not advocating making the code available to the public either, only to certified personal on an investigation team – not associated with political party or voting machine affiliates.
For one individual to hack one voting machine would be a drop in the bucket as far as results are concerned. The issue is with the initial code load on each machine. If THAT code is malicious, then there is a problem.
The easiest point of entry for high impact is the tallying machine. The implications are stated in my previous post.
Thanks for the clarification, I think! I was not defending Diebold, I was just conjecturing (now there’s a word) why the code would be kept secret. Seems like your proposal would be workable, and reasonable.
Sol,
If the executables were burned onto a non-reprogrammable ROM, and the burn done under supervised and certified conditions, they’d be almost 100% trustworthy.
There’d still need to be a RAM-loaded layer over the top, though, that would be programmable by local election commissioners, to put the names and races in.
Both the ROM and RAM code could be checksummed, with the checksum printing with every paper receipt. The valid “checksum of the day” could be posted with the sample ballots, and verifiable by every voter.
Okay, the voting machines are tied to a tallying machine? Like a monitor and a server? or is each machine doing it’s own tallying? My ignorance here is enormous, I am afraid.
Littlejohn,
It depends on the machine vendor. The iVotronic machines used in Sedgwick County are daisy-chained for each polling place, and the “first” machine in the chain prints the totals at the end of the day. But each machine also has its own tape, so they can be compared to the polling place totals, if necessary.
Tom,
W/o the source code open for investigation then the problem still exists. The paper ballot it produces is smoke and mirrors if the code is malicious.
Little john,
The voting machines are independent and have a memory card installed. At the end of the voting, the cards are collected and entered into the tallying machine. – The voting machine collects the votes onto a memory card. Those cards are fed into a tallying – or counting – machine. Both the voting and tallying machines are subject to malicious code i.e. throwing elections.
Can’t we just trust the Government like the Bush admin wants us to do?
Sol,
If the executables are burned at the factory, and all that’s there is graphics-rendering and tabulating code, there’s not going to be a way for an elections commissioner’s staff to rig the tabulation of any specific machine. All they could do is lie about the count. And as long as there’s a printed tape that records every vote in every machine, that’s a tough lie to maintain.
Thanks to both Tom and SOlDevVB.Although it seems they are saying slightly different things. Perhaps different machines for different locations? ANyway, thanks for the information. I mistrust the damn things anyway. Of course, I don’t know that I trust humans any further
Tom,
It is my personal belief that diebold sells elections. So even if they did burn the code at the factory, it wouldn’t be that difficult to set the code up to accept some variables to inaccurately record those votes. At that point, all the tape in the world is worthless.
The tallying machines are the most vulnerable to this.
“It is my personal belief that diebold sells elections. ”
Why? Not why they would, but why do you believe that?
Sol,
I don’t trust Diebold either. I think each major political party should be able to have access to the source code, executables, and checksums and be able to have professional programmers review the source. All with proper NDA’s and such, of course.
As CF always says, they will ratf**k it everytime. They are familiar with leapfrogging technology. And they seem to always be the ones jumping over someone else.
LJ,
this explains it far better than I ever could.
http://www.hackingdemocracy.com/
“In the Goyle case, Foulston and the Sedgwick County sheriff’s office found that while the Democrat had entered some polling places to observe the voting and spoken with some voters and poll workers, he had a right to do so and his conduct did not violate the state’s ban on electioneering within 250 feet of a polling place.”
This actually happened. He walked up to those in line, introduced himself and said he was running for office. If this isn’t electioneering I don’t know what it is. I was in line when this happened at Maranantha.
The demos have no gripe coming on unfair elections. Say what you want about Huy but she didn’t cheat to win. If this is the type of candidate you sheeple can vote in. Go for it.
Filmed over three years it documents anomalies and irregularities with ‘e-voting’ (electronic voting) systems that occurred during America’s 2000 and 2004 elections, especially in Volusia County, Florida. The film investigates the flawed integrity of electronic voting machines and culminates dramatically in the on camera hacking of the in-use / working election system in Leon County, Florida.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacking_Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacking_Democracy#Demonstrated_flaws
Harri Hursti’s attack does work: Mr. Hursti’s attack on the AV-OS is definitely real. He was indeed able to change the election results by doing nothing more than modifying the contents of a memory card. He needed no passwords, no cryptographic keys, and no access to any other part of the voting system, including the GEMS election management server.”
Are voting machines really secure?
Who cares? The press has already decided it will be Hillary/Obama all the way. First white woman and black man is a combo to pass up for headlines.
The blue will win 51% - 49%. It will illustrate the melting pot of America in a grand way. It will be declared a major victory. They will say it is the voice of the people demanding new direction. They will say it is the vast majority demanding social change. The American people have spoken.
The Congress will be half full or half empty blue/red.
And the civil war of the Blue and Red will progress as promised.In spite of the polls and votes being fixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_fraud#Physical_tampering_with_voting_machines
Ksgrm,
After the 2000 census, Bonnie Huy had her 87th District redrawn specifically to exclude her 2000 opponent, Elizabeth Bishop. The 99th District, which is mostly Andover, was drawn alllll the way into east Wichita where it cuts a residential neighborhood in half; they line goes just far enough to put Bishop, who almost beat Huy, into the 99th District.
Don’t talk to us about honest politics.
GMC — Did you not see the article out of Ohio, where they cannot find 2/3 of the 2004 Presidential ballots??? Somehow they were lost and/or destroyed… even AFTER a Judge ordered that they be kept secure until after all hearings on the election had been completed…
Has anyone but me noticed that germie’s FIRST go-to position is ALWAYS “they did it too” or “they did it first”?
No matter if it is Clinton or bon bon, her first excuse is always that someone else did it first/too.
I thought that excuse was not valid after the fifth grade…
Farmgrrl,
Even the _REPUBLICAN_ election judge at the Maranatha Worship Center’s polling place stated that Goyle was acting properly, and not electioneering.
Ksgrm and the rest of Huy’s allies are doing everything they can to smear Goyle, and drag his reputation through the mud, in preparation for next year’s election cycle. It would be nice to see them attack his record instead of making stuff up. It’s like last week’s debate about Goyle’s role in getting SB244 passed. I had to repeatedly correct Econ’s understanding of the facts, which he conceded in the end. (Econ, I’m not saying you were spreading lies, I’m saying you listened to the lies of others).
It’s all about the smear. It’s all the radicals know. And it’s all based on fear - fear that they’re losing control, as the “Loyalty Committee” so aptly demonstrates.
Tom I am not trying to drag anyones name down. I am honestly concerned that a candidate did this and it was written off as insignificant by the demo DA. I am not privy to the info you have on how Huy was able to redraw district lines so I will have to take your word for it. And yes farmie I will continue to talk about lawbreaking when I see it whether it is red or blue misdoings. Unlike you I can see wrong where it lies.
Tom fill me in on the redistricting debacle. I haven’t heard of it. Her district is all over the map but then so is the dividing line from Butler to Sedgwick and also the Andover/Wichita line.
Tom by the way the ‘loyalty pledge’ you talk about will never happen and if it does the rank of the independents will grow.
Ksgrm,
The REPUBLICAN election judge at Maranatha was a professional, trained eyewitness to Goyle’s behavior at the polling place. She told the press and the DA’s investigators that “she did not observe Goyle engage in any campaigning, though she did observe him speak with poll agents and say “hi” or wave to a few individuals he knew.”
Source: http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/da/criminal_media/2007/ElectioneeringReview.pdf
So either you’re spreading your own lies, or you’re spreading someone else’s lies. You’ve been caught lying here before, so understand that my opinion is that you’re lying now and you know it.
As to the 99th/87th Districts boundary - take a look at
http://skyways.lib.ks.us/ksleg/KLRD/2002LDP/h087.pdfandhttp://skyways.lib.ks.us/ksleg/KLRD/2002LDP/h099.pdf
That little “finger” into the 87th wasn’t there until Bishop almost beat Huy in 2000. Guess who’s house is at the very tip of that finger?
Oh, and Ksgrm,
The Kansas Republican Party does indeed have a shiny new Loyalty Committee. They created it on Saturday. Kris Kobach, the KSGOP Chair, also chairs that committee.
Do try to keep up with the news.
Hell, if the Republicans gamed the system the paper trail would just get lost or destroyed.
Hell, if the Republicans gamed the system the paper trail would just get lost or destroyed.
Posted by: The Phantom | August 03, 2007 at 05:43 PM
I don’t know, an awful lot of dead democrats voted in St Louis……
First step should be to require photo identification from all voters. Don’t try to tell me how this would be difficult for our poor, old, and feeble.
You have to have photo id to pick up your food stamps and welfare payments, and WIC cheese. Additionally, I haven’t found a bank yet which will cash one of those checks without ID.
Although I care who wins and who loses, what bothers me to the point of rebellion, is a fixed election and dishonest voters.
…and germie is caught in YET another lie…
I was trained on the current election machines. During the training, I pointed out numerous vulnerabilities to the system. I asked thing like why wasn’t the compact flash cards secured with a lock rather than a Zip tie or nothing at all? I asked why the PEB wasn’t serial numbered and/or have some type of unlock key? I asked why the software used to read the software want more secure? Why it was able to manually change the vote in the software? All it would take is two semi-high level vote counters to fix an election. or it could even take a determined pole worker to change the results on the PEB. I note that the voting machines have a paper trail, but no one looks at those unless its contested? Who would contest a close election with a Republican winning in Kansas? The odds are slim.
A determined regular person who knew enough about the system could make a copy of the flash card, replace the one in the machine with that one and no one would be any the wiser…
My point is that the system is flawed. It could be easily fixed but the county and/or the company has decided not to fully secure these systems…
The sore losers who supported Huy are still whining; even though each and every allegation they have made has been proved FALSE.
Face it, not only did your incumbent get beat she got thrashed!
Tom–
I think your analysis of Chappell’s campaign was a little harsh.
Landwehr is a strong candidate as an incumbent–cagey, mean, and tough.
I’ve met her and heard her speak.
I can’t think of any local Repub running for State Rep. harder to knock off than her with the exception of Potoff, who’s earned respect as a moderate.
I was surprised that Chappell did as well as he did, actually.
Is this the same Walt Chappell that said, “white people should be slaves for a year to see what it is like to be black?
He is off his rocker!