Post Number: 566
Best of Black Box?
|Posted on Monday, June 6, 2005 - 4:25 pm: |
Blueman: I enjoyed your post -- have a comment or two.
As a software professional with 30 years of programming experience, I find this news extremely disturbing - not just because of the obviously sloppy and incompetent programming, but because in my judgement there is no legitimate reason for choosing the wide-open, totally insecure architecture they went with. I can only conclude that the Diebold machines were designed to cheat state certification tests. The state inspector can only test the base code that resides on the ROM chip inside the machine. The machine can be programmed to pass the certification tests, then behave in a totally different way when a RAM memory card is inserted. If I had my way, all Diebold machines nationwide would be decertified pending a thorough investigation by each state's attorney general, with criminal charges a possibility.
Another thing we found, but I want to confirm this with the source code when we do the technical report: It appears that there is a function written into the code to correct "rounding errors." (Which can only occur when votes that have fractions are added up -- and the only way that can occur is vote-shaving, as far as I know.)
Can you think of any legitimate reason to have a function like that in the software?