Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| Some questions for Mr. Bellman re Hur... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
John Kesich
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: John_kesich
Post Number: 20
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 11:26 am: | 
|
Does anyone know what really happened in Pennsylvania?
One can find various reports both on the web and in newspapers claiming that Dr Shamos ordered PA's Diebold TSX machines sequestered.
Wouldn't Secretary Cortes have been the person to take any action regarding voting systems in PA? What authority would Dr Shamos have to sequester anything? Is he not merely a technical consultant?
I have searched the pa.us website for some official explanation as to what was wrong and what was done to make these systems acceptable for use in yesterday's primary but haven't been able to find anything. No mention even on the certification status page.
Are you aware of any official statements or explanations by PA authorities regarding Hursti II and its aftermath? Can you suggest another web resource where PA authorities might have posted?
Given that any "fix" would have entailed changing the system from what was certified, shouldn't the system+fix have had to be resubmitted to the ITA for recertification as was done when the AutoMARK required a minor patch? Can you cite any law, PA or federal, which would allow Secretary Cortes to use an uncertified system?
Interestingly, the poll workers at my precinct not only didn't know what had been done to "fix" the machines but hadn't heard that there was a problem or that the machines had been sequestered. Have not yet taken this up with my Elections Supervisor, wonder if he too lives on the parallel earth where Hursti II never happened. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 292
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 12:25 pm: |
|
Yes John,
Dr. Shamos didn't order anything. He suggested a regime of physical handling and chain of custody of the machines to minimize the risk of a Hursti II attack.
To the best of my understanding, Secretary Cortes ordered a fresh install, from PCMCIA cards provided by the state, of the exact software that WAS certified by the ITA's and Dr. Shamos, just in case there was an APPLICATION LAYER attack already performed between arrival of the systems and preparation for the actual election.
You seem to be assuming that Cortes ordered an upgrade. He did not. He ordered a re-install to get the systems back to their original condidtion, or as nearly so as can be done in the time that remained.
I understand that the "remediation" would not necessarily be effective against an OS or bootloader attack, but what he recommended was the best that could be managed in the time that remained. And it would remediate the most OBVIOUS type of attack that was conceivable. Not the most DANGEROUS, the most OBVIOUS and LIKELY one.
John, are you in Tioga County? If you are, the election director there is a fine fellow, who would have read Cortes' communication. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 294
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 12:37 pm: |
|
John,
Also, the Pennsylvania Department of State rarely communicates with county election offices by email, and posts only things designed to be accessible to the general public on its website, with a very few exceptions.
The communication would have almost certainly been done by fax. It is their "style".
Kurt |
|
|
