Forum Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Forum Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Forum Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Forum Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| 12-13-05: Devastating hack proven - L... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jim March
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jimmarch
Post Number: 76
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 59 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 3:42 pm: | 
|
UPDATE Dec. 16: Volusia County (FL) joins Leon in dumping Diebold. 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 stockholder's class action suits and related actions have been filed against Diebold by four separate law firms. 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.
The Hursti Hack requires a moderate level of inside access. It is, however, accomplished without being given any password and with the same level of access given thousands of poll workers across the USA. It is a particularly dangerous exploit, because it changes votes in a one-step process that will not be detected in any normal canvassing procedure, it requires only a single a credit-card sized memory card, any single individual with access to the memory cards can do it, and it requires only a small piece of equipment which can be purchased off the Internet for a few hundred dollars.
One thousand two hundred locations in the U.S. and Canada use Diebold voting machines. In each of these locations, typically three people have a high level of inside access. Temporary employees also often have brief access to loose memory cards as machines are being prepared for elections. Poll workers sometimes have a very high level of inside access. National elections utilize up to two million poll workers, with hundreds or thousands in a single jurisdiction.
Many locations in the U.S. ask poll workers to take voting machines home with them with the memory cards inside. San Diego County (Calif) sent 713 voting machines/memory cards home with poll workers for its July 26 election, and King County (Wash.) sent over 500 voting machines home with poll workers before its Nov. 8 election.
Memory cards are held in a compartment protected by a small plastic seal. However, these simple seals can be defeated, and Hursti has found evidence that the memory card can be reprogrammed without disturbing the seal by using a telephone modem port on the back of the machine.
The Hursti Hack, referred to as “the mother of all security holes” was first exposed in a formal report on July 4. (http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf).
Diebold has insisted to county and state election officials that despite Hursti’s demonstration, changing votes on its memory cards is impossible. (Public records from Diebold, including threat letter to Ion Sancho:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/10535.html)
On Oct. 17, 2005 Diebold Elections Systems Research and Development chief Pat Green specifically told the Cuyahoga County (Ohio) board of elections during a $21 million purchasing session that votes cannot be changed using only a memory card. (Video of Pat Green: http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/14298.html) Over the objections of Cuyahoga County citizens, and relying on the veracity of Diebold’s statements, the board has chosen to purchase the machines.
According to Public Records obtained by Black Box Voting, Diebold has promulgated misrepresentations about both the Hursti Hack and another kind of hack by Dr. Herbert Thompson to secretaries of state, and to as many as 800 state and local elections officials.
Stockholder suit filed by the law offices of Stull, Stull & Brady and also by Scott and Scott.
Stull Stull & Brady lawsuit: http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/8/15603.html
and http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002153.htm
Diebold CEO resigns: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=175001748
Volusia County dumps Diebold too
Orlando Sentinel
DELAND -- Diebold voting machines will soon be history in Volusia County. After a nearly five-hour hearing today, County Council members voted to replace its Diebold machines with an entirely new system manufactured by Election Systems & Software.
The move, which will cost more than $2.5 million just for the equipment, was prompted by a federal mandate to buy at least one handicapped-accessible voting machine per precinct by Jan. 1. But the only such devices approved for use in Florida are ATM-like touch-screen machines that don't use paper ballots. But a majority of County Council members want devices that use paper.
The agreement approved Friday on a 4-3 vote allows the county to trade in the paperless touch screens for an ES&S-supported ballot-marking device with an accessible touch-screen called AutoMark if it gets approved for use in Florida. That would cost an additional $150,000.
If AutoMark certification doesn't happen by April 1, the county has the option to get out of the entire contract with ES&S and get a full refund.
Chairman Frank Bruno, Art Giles, Carl Persis and Dwight Lewis voted for the ES&S contract. Council members Joie Alexander, Bill Long and Dwight Lewis opposed it.
The vote ends a nearly year-old debate in Volusia County about how to comply with the federal Help America Vote Act, which mandates accessible voting devices.
KUDOS TO SUSAN PYNCHON, Florida Fair Elections Coalition
Permission to reprint granted with link to http://blackboxvoting.org
|
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 1321
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 4:05 pm: |
|
Wow.
And what with the securities fraud lawsuit just filed against Diebold, it's like a one-two punch.
Surely the media will find this difficult to ignore. Let's make sure they don't. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 27
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 5:16 pm: |
|
This is pretty significant guys... will there be a tech. report of sorts from BBV on this event? (Something we can cite/point to that lists the specifics of how this experiment was conducted.) best, Joe |
Jim March
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jimmarch
Post Number: 77
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 5:22 pm: |
|
You BET there will be a full report. This is just the preliminary heads-up.
Also: this was all done without getting any passwords for any system. All we had was the same degree of physical access that any mid-to-high level elections staffer or official would have. In any county you can figure there will be at least three people (the top guy in the department, the top tech guy and his backup) with enough access to do this and often more. It only takes one being corrupt to pull this off.
And that's in counties that are least trying for a reasonable level of security. All too often they either allow Diebold on-site employees/contractors too much access or they practically turn the whole process over to Diebold. The latter is more common in smaller/rural counties but not unheard of in bigger.
In such cases the number of potential fraudsters goes up. |
John Dean
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bozosforbush
Post Number: 101
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 7:06 pm: |
|
This is a great day...the best news I have heard in a long time. Three cheers, and 100 more, for Bev, Harri, Jim, and everyone else involved in this fight.
John
Deserter, brain is fried, no WMDs, yada yada yada. No wonder we clowns laugh.
|
Lara Marks
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Meowomon
Post Number: 1
Registered: 12-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 11:56 pm: |
|
The media in Tallahasse ignored this. I live here in Jeb's back yard and when I called the editor at the Tallahasse Democrat, she argued with me that the Diebold CEO resignation and impending lawsuit were not significant. I then called Ion Sancho, Supervosor of electios and he told me of the plan to dump the Diebold machines. See my blog, http://www.sendthelesbianstocanada.com
It is still not being reported in the Tallahassee Democrat. Please email them to let them know you are disappointed in the lack of media response. |
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2935
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 1:34 am: |
|
The Tallahassee Democrat has done very good coverage of this. They have already published articles earlier, and this project was completed after deadline today. I expect you will see it appear tomorrow or the next day.
Thanks, Lara, for your voice in this matter. Keep the tone positive, because you will see mainstream media coverage. The press deadline was well past when we finished at 7 p.m. tonight.
Love ya,
Bev Harris |
Lara Marks
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Meowomon
Post Number: 2
Registered: 12-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 10:48 am: |
|
Bev, as I have posted on the Brad Blog, The Tallahassee Democrat was traded by Knight-Ridder for a strange deal with Gannett. The new editor decided to put national news and other new items on the back pages and wrote and editorial as to why this was their "editorial" decision. Since then it has had (IMHO)nothing but fluff pieces and recipes on the front to pacify the Bible thumpers who have taken over the politcal spectrum of this area. I LIVE HERE! So don't tell me to stay positve when I feel as if my Constituional Right to a free press has been usurped by the right wing political forces in this country. I will not be silent and I will not put a "positive" SPIN on anything as long as our Constitutional Rights (like the one to vote) are being stripped everyday! I live as an out Gay person in this area and have lost employment because I will not be silent! I have had violence perpetuated on me and friends because I am Gay and I will not be silent and I will not be "positive" when there is little or nothing to be pos}itive about. |
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2939
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 11:16 am: |
|
Was it traded after July 2005? Because the Tallahassee Democrat provided some of the first coverage of the Hursti hacks in Leon County. You'll find their articles by clicking the "News" tab (top left) at this site.
This is a very controversial issue and sometimes newspapers report on things that are negative -- like the Florida Supervisors saying the Voting Rights Act is unneccessary -- but that doesn't mean the reporter shares those beliefs. It is very important to report those negative things and get them on record. I can't speak for their coverage on other issues, as I don't follow that.
On this issue, their recent coverage is less pleasing than their earlier coverage, which is why I wonder when the corporate governance changed. There are also big difference among reporters as to perspective and "spin."
Coverage by Tallahassee Democrat:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/9516.html- August 2005 - I'd give this article a negative rating, but it reflects more on the Florida Supervisors of Elections than the newspaper that reports this.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/9379.html - July 2005 - This article is misleading and I give it a poor rating
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/6672.html - June 2005 - rather nasty coverage, but reflects on Diebold more than the reporter I think, though it would have been nice for him to get quotes from relevant people on both sides of the issue. This story pertains to Diebold's threat letter to Ion Sancho.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/6609.html - June 2005 -- good story, good coverage, balanced
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/1483.html Jan 2005 -- good story, balanced |
John Gideon
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Johngideon
Post Number: 200
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 11:47 am: |
|
When will there be an announcement from Leon County about this situation? Is Ion Sancho going to put out a media release of some type?
Information Manager, VotersUnite.org
|
Pat A. Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 2025
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 12:04 pm: |
|
For now there's this from the Leon County Supervisor of Elections web site, http://www.leonfl.org/elect/SpecialReport.htm
<start>
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Special Report: Black Box Voting Attempts to Penetrate The Leon County Florida Optical Scan Voting System.
In January of this year Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho was contacted by representatives of Black Box Voting .org, a non-partisan elections advocacy group, to see if their computer experts could successfully circumvent the security of the Leon County voting system. Supervisor Sancho agreed to this proposal and in three separate attempts over a four month period, computer experts Dr. Herbert Thompson and Harri Hursti visited the Leon County Elections Office in their efforts to penetrate the county voting tabulation equipment and alter election data.
The tests focused on two areas: outside or external hacks, specifically examining the modem and any lines going to the vote tabulation computer, and simulated inside or internal penetrations. The results were clear. No outside hack was accomplished. This was not the case however when the hacker was physically present at the vote tabulation computer terminal.
Granted the same access as an employee of our office, it was possible to enter the computer, alter election results, and exit the system without leaving any physical record of this action. It was also demonstrated that false information or instructions could be placed on a memory card (the device used to program the individual voting machines and record the voter’s votes) and create false results or election reports.
What conclusions can be drawn from this exercise? First, the optical scan voting system was resistant to external penetration, including using the modems which transmit election results from the precincts to the central vote accumulator. Outside hacking is seen as one of the greatest potential threats to undermining citizen confidence in the election process. The Leon County Supervisor of Elections is tremendously relieved that such penetration was not accomplished.
Secondly, the potential for internal sabotage does exist. It is imperative that security protocols be developed which limit access to the central voting computer and memory cards in election offices. Limited access, video surveillance, and tight controls on the use and distribution of memory cards, all practices currently in place in the Leon County Election Office, are vital to ensure unauthorized actions do not compromise the integrity of the elections process.
Finally, the ultimate insurance that Leon County’s votes are counted correctly resides in the paper ballots of the voters themselves. If the public or election official has any question over the results of an election, a hand count of the optical paper ballot provides the truth. No internal manipulation of any computer or memory card can alter the votes on these paper ballots.
Based upon the data developed out of this exercise it is the opinion of the Leon County Supervisor of Elections that any effort to limit or remove the manual examination of paper ballots to confirm the correctness of election results is not in the public interest.
<end>
I'll see what I can dig up in the way of remarks Ion has made to the press in the last 48 hours.
PAV ;-) |
Linda Franz
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Linda_franz
Post Number: 174
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 12:06 pm: |
|
Way to go guys.
Can we ever thank Ion Sancho enough for his courage and dedication to the truth?
Opportunities abound, not only with poll workers taking machines home, but also in the lack of real chain-of-custody for the cards. If the cards aren't uploaded at the polls, if a card has a "problem" and is taken somewhere else for resolution, if the cards are not witnessed in the entire process of taking them out of the machines and uploading the results......I'm sure there are more opportunities.
And if the card hack does not require a bona fide computer expert at the point of the hack? In other words, since the cards can be programmed ahead of time, it might only be necessary to "follow instructions" to accomplish the card hack? Or programming on the official card that the election officer is unaware of? Then the potential of the hack for more widespread distribution.....well, it's not a pretty thought.
Not only has it been curious and frustrating encountering the resistance to a voter verified paper record/trail/ballot, which now seems to be going the way of paper (verifiability)- but the next huge fight against any form of auditing elections to verify the accuracy of the machine count is just nuts. This should be a red flag and a clue to journalists to start digging. |
John Gideon
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Johngideon
Post Number: 201
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 12:34 pm: |
|
Pat, that statement on the Leon Co. site has been there for awhile. Thanks for doing the search. I've been looking on and off all day today.
Information Manager, VotersUnite.org
|
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2940
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 12:38 pm: |
|
Nope, what's listed above is not the media release. The date automatically updates on that, but it's from a long time ago.
Black Box Voting followed exactly the same procedure with disclosure of the story today that we did in May. However now both Harri Hursti and Ion Sancho are so much more high profile -- and with general interest raised due to the California hack, Wally O'Dell's resignation, and the stockholder lawsuit -- the press is all over this.
I'm sure Mr. Sancho will issue a statement as soon as he can prepare it the way he wants. Mr. Sancho may have been surprised at the immediacy and intensity of the media inquiries, since the confluence of events produced a much hotter press environment this time than we experienced last May.
Although Black Box Voting has his announcement on videotape, and his statements are direct, to the point, and clear as a bell, the press needs the confirm to come directly from him before they can run with it.
That's the problem with media. At first it ignores things and then a tipping point is hit -- then it smacks everyone in sight against the wall like a ship in gale-force winds.
Ion Sancho is a national hero. Other elections officials are coming forward now, but it is Sancho who had the courage to lead. |
Lara Marks
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Meowomon
Post Number: 3
Registered: 12-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 1:09 pm: |
|
Yes, The Tallahassee Democrat was traded after July. Just back in October 2005. And they are notoriously Right Wing, or as they call it "family friendly" They even posted an editorial on why they were no longer putting World news on the front page.
I live here in the heart of Jesusland (not in Leon County anymore where I was a resident for almost 15 years) and I have been a victim of right wing prejudice because I refuse to live my life in the closet. Now I find out that when I voted in 2000 in Leon County the machines may have been hacked by a REPUBLICAN controlled corporation whose CEO has been accuse of saying he will deliver REPUBLICAN votes to Ohio. My Constitutional right to vote may have been violated. Have they (REPUBLICANS) really stolen the election electronically? I don't think we will ever know the truth. But I do know that with the REPUBLICANS in control, my rights have been taken away in many other ways.
I do know that Mr. Ion Sancho, in my humble opinion, as far as I have known him or of him is a fine example of integrity and honesty. I don't say that about very many people whether elected or not. |
John Gideon
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Johngideon
Post Number: 202
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 2:07 pm: |
|
Bev, you say "the press is all over this". Where is the press all over this except for the blogosphere? There is NOTHING in the MSM about this test or any statements from Ion. I would love to be able to send something out to my mailing list of Wa. state legislators about it but I need an MSM story about it.
Information Manager, VotersUnite.org
|
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2941
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 2:19 pm: |
|
Yes. The press is all over this. Why would you expect interviews taking place today to be online right now?
I haven't been able to get off the phone, and I'm just a bit player.
USA Today is covering O'Dell's resignation.
I am seeing a general lack of understanding about typical news timelines in the mainstream media. Internet media is much quicker.
The mainstream media can cover O'Dell's resignation, but that's not a major story unless it has a tie-in to something else. They can't speculate about it being due to voting machines, they'd have to have a source or proof or a statement from Diebold.
They can cover the stockholder's suit and they will, but they usually wait until they have a copy of the lawsuit in hand, and they go over it and make a few phone calls to sources for quotes. Take away all political stuff and let's say this is a normal news story -- I'd expect that to take 2-3 days.
Obviously, there are quicker turnarounds, but it depends on how "hot" the story is. To make it "hot" you need tie-ins with other breaking news or you need it to be one of those feeding frenzy stories that everyone's trying to scoop each other on.
For the hack story, they need a direct confirm from Ion Sancho. Since this happened after deadline last night, that means they couldn't get that quote until today for tonight's news. They'll get a more thorough story if they get Ion Sancho's formal press release, and they'll wait for that.
It's not at all unusual for the media to take 3-4 days on a story. Yes, often a story is covered same-day, and this would have been if we'd invited the press to stand there and watch, offering a chance to interview Sancho and Hursti afterward, but the complexity of organizing everything, including bringing people here from other countries and around the U.S., did not lend itself to adding to the zoo. There was discretion about the schedule, and even I did not know exactly when it would take place yesterday until a couple hours before.
Therefore the effort was to document it meticulously and release the information afterwards. |
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2943
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 4:41 pm: |
|
The difference between the May 26 Hursti Hack and the Dec. 13 Hursti Hack:
On May 26, Hursti did three exploits:
1a) Changed report of the votes without changing the internal data (votes themselves). In this version he kept the program size the same, on the theory that Diebold might have code that checks to see if the program was the wrong size, and therefore possibly tampered. No error message was produced and a tampered report was produced.
1b) Same as above, but with the program a different size. No error report was produced and a tampered report was produced
2) Pre-stuffing the ballot box -- changing the vote data itself, without changing the report of the votes. This produced a "zero report" (a correct one) that showed the pre-stuffed votes.
----------------------
Yesterday, Hursti:
- pre-stuffed the ballot box with plus/minus votes
- altered the code to produce a hacked zero report (similar to 1b above).
This produced a zero report despite the fact that there were votes in the ballot box.
- Ballots were run through the scanner.
- Results report was run from the scanner
- Votes from the memory card were uploaded into GEMS
- Ran results report from GEMS
No error reports were produced at any time.
Whereas the tests on May 26 proved that it is possible to manipulate voting machine results reports and proved that you can pre-stuff the ballot box, we still had not achieved proof of concept for the theory that you can falsify a zero report at the same time as pre-stuffing the ballot box, nor had we yet proved that the pre-stuffed ballot box will work properly after running ballots through the machine, nor had we yet proved that such altered data could be uploaded into GEMS without triggering error messages.
On Dec. 13, Hursti proved that the entire system can be compromised without producing error messages and without leaving a trace, using nothing but a memory card. |
Patricia Tavormina
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Patty
Post Number: 37
Registered: 04-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 5:18 pm: |
|
No offense, Bev, but I always feel like the reports we get on this very important issue are the final smoking gun. I felt that way in February, and again in May, and again now. Then the next report comes out, and it points to why the previous reports were incomplete (as you illustrate above.) I feel like, quite frankly, I was fed a line about some tipping point being reached, only to wait, and wait, and wait.... and eventually learn that the previous report was not conclusive. A big part of the problem is my lack of technical understanding of these machines. But another part is that you aren't telling us the shortcomings of each report, or issues that haven't yet been ironed out.
Can you tell me what chinks exist in the present report? IOW, what would Diebold throw at you to say "Yes but, you still couldn't X, Y, or Z."
What is the X, Y, Z that hasn't been shown yet?
Notwithstanding, thank you for your very hard and tireless work.
from Bev: Patty -- The original report is very clear as to what was tested and what was not. It explicitly marks the items we have proof of concept on vs. those that we recommend for further testing. http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf). The test yesterday consummated one of the items recommended for further testing. However, the report is 32 pages, so I summarized the differences here for people who are new to Black Box Voting and haven't seen the report. -- Bev |
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2945
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 3:01 am: |
|
For a mainstream media article about this story, see the Miami Herald's piece: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/13410061.htm |
Pat A. Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 2027
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 3:14 am: |
|
Hi Patricia,
I'm not sure what you mean by "the final smoking gun" or why you would expect any one piece of this puzzle to be the 'final' anything. I certainly don't get that impression from reading these reports.
These reports are just what they are, reports, from Black Box Voting.org to their members and other interested persons who request them. This report deals with a successful hack performed in Leon County, Florida on Wednesday, December 13. The report gives full details of the hack performed, the witnesses present, and the conclusions expressed by Ion Sancho. See snips below.
"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."
<snip>
"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."
As you can see, this report is as complete as it needs to be for what it is and concerns only one manufacturer of voting machines and in only one location. It says nothing about ES&S, Sequoia, Hart Intercivic or any other manufacturer nor does it in any way purport to be a "smoking gun" that will change everything or anything, other than the opinions of the elections officials who authorized and witnessed this test.
It is however a "devastating" hack for Diebold's reputation in the sense that Diebold made numerous claims about the security of their election systems after the earlier Leon County hack that have now been proved false by expert witnesses who can be called into legal disputes that may arise from the false claims made to elections officials in Leon Co. and elsewhere. This is just one more small step in a long march to reclaim our elections.
Any 'feelings' that anyone may develop about the significance of these reports to the overall problem of 'election fraud', beyond what the reports actually say, are purely their own.
If you're expecting some magical 'smoking gun' to surface that will end decades of election fraud conducted by some members of all political parties, then I'm afraid that you are going to be sadly disappointed.
Election fraud takes many forms and the vulnerabilities of the voting machines are but one of them. Diebold is just fraction of the overall problem and we here all know this. No one here would be foolish enough to make any claims to the contrary. I see no such claims in this or any other report from BBV.org.
You ask about "chinks" in the present report, "issues that haven't been ironed out", and how Diebold would respond.
Let me address that by pointing out that Black Box Voting.org has been the only public organization that has managed to get the cooperation of any elections officials in any jurisdiction to allow a demonstration or testing on actual equipment in use in elections. That in itself is quite a feat.
You seem to feel that "the previous report was not conclusive". I beg to differ. In fact, the previous report most certainly was conclusive as this latest test just proved. Harri's hack works whether the machine is hacked on it's own or as part of the entire system. Once the totals have been manipulated there is nothing in the rest of the system that can tell that the results have been modified, despite Diebold's claims to the contrary.
At first, all BBV.org could do was demonstrations on standard computers that showed that the software could be hacked. Diebold responded with a pack of lies and claimed that it was nothing more than the equivalent of a "magic show" and that the hacks demonstrated wouldn't work on their equipment.
BBV.org was able to convince Ion Sancho to allow a test on an actual machine that proved that Diebold had lied.
Diebold then changed their claims and threatened Leon County with voiding their warranty for allowing the machine to be hacked! Their claim then became that BBV had only hacked a part of the system and the hack wouldn't work on a fully configured election system.
This latest test proves, once and for all, that Diebold LIED about their security once again. I fully expect them to continue to lie in the hope that no one will notice. I can assure both you and Diebold, we here will notice and Black Box Voting.org will continue to work to expose their lies.
A few words about the press to those reading this thread.
As far as the press is concerned, my bet is that BBV.org winds up getting more 'main stream media' to report on this latest test than the weeks old GAO report has garnered in the 'MSM' so far. Both are important developments to our fight and BBV.org is in an excellent position to raise the issue of the underreported GAO report as this story develops.
Let me end by saying that we post here under our own names for a reason. It seems that every time BBV.org exposes another factual piece of this complex puzzle, a small but vocal group of extremists, from both major political parties, show up on several popular political web sites to bash Bev and BBV.org. They hide behind assumed screen names and make absurd, easily refutable claims.
They claim that "Bev stole other peoples research and claimed it was her own" when she wrote the Black Box Voting book. To refute that claim all one needs to do is read the book. It's free and available in pdf format on the front page of this site. I challenge anyone to read the book and point out a single line in it that is not properly attributed to the original source within the text, the hundreds of end notes, or on the acknowledgments page in the back of the book.
They claim that this is all a "scam" and "Bev is only in it for the money". If that's the case, then Bev and company are 'accidentally' exposing more factual information about what is really happening in our elections than any other 'legitimate' election reform group that I'm aware of. At the same time, Bev apparently managed to get some of the worlds best computer security experts to go along with the scam. (Damn I'm impressed! Well I would be if it were true that this is a scam.)
They make claims that "Bev hasn't produced anything! Well, that's a totally believable claim, if you just ignore the facts that;
A) Bev found the Diebold source code on an open, unprotected server and made it public starting this whole debate about Diebold's honesty concerning their security. (Diebold and some of these same people who bash BBV.org initially claimed that the software was not the same as that currently used in elections but that claim has since been proved to be false.)
B) Bev made public thousands of internal Diebold memos and e-mails, supplied by an insider, that demonstrate a pattern of lies and deceit on the part of Diebold management when dealing with various elections officials. (Again, the initial claim was that the documents were fake, that is, until a Diebold attorney accidentally confirmed that they were indeed real!)
C) Bev and Kathleen orchestrated the largest public records request ever, to gather audit records from over 3000 jurisdictions, for a single election. (I know for a fact that boxes of these records have been turned over to John Conyers staff and other prominent politicians in several states and they are still being actively investigated. Thousands of these documents are available in the Document Archive on this site for anyone to view if they so desire.)
D) Bev has spurred more newspaper, magazine & Internet articles, and radio & television segments that have raised public awareness, than anyone from any other organization out there. (I've been archiving these stories and appearances for several years now and I'm confidant that any search engine out there will confirm this as FACT. Bev and BBV.org are certainly not the only people out there raising awareness but they have been the most proficient at it in terms of reaching the general public.)
E) Bev Harris and Kathleen Wynne personally raided dumpsters to collect evidence of everything from forged ballots and poll tapes to financial documents that show unreported payments to lobbyists. They have also personally videotaped potentially incriminating statements made by key players in this drama. (See above and also check the Video Archives section of this site if you don't believe it.)
I could go on and on but I think I've made my point. Don't trust everything you read that's posted by nameless people on partisan political web sites. Many people on those sites share a common trait, they refuse to see the evil done by their own party and blame all the problems on 'the other guys'. History and the courts prove otherwise. The election fraud 'business' is an equal opportunity employer.
It's a shame that so many people who consider themselves part of the "reality based community" are so blind to the reality staring them in the face.
Sorry for the rant. I just get tired of reading this kind of crap on sites that are so scared that we might challenge their view of reality that they've banned us from responding to the lies they post or allow to be posted on their sites. I figured that since many of those people seem to be paying particular attention to this thread they might want to comment on what I've posted here.
Perhaps someone can explain why BBV.org has been able to get the cooperation of election officials to allow testing of actual systems in both Florida and California if, as they claim, "no voting officials will have anything to do with Bev Harris or BBV.org".
I'd also like them to explain why Bev and Jim March seem to get invited to speak at voting rights events with so many other activists when, according to the same few people, "no voting rights activists will have anything to do with Bev or BBV.org".
They might also want to check out the list of participants in our recent 'think tank' link located on the front page of the forums section. Do they contend that those people aren't really voting rights activists and elections officials or are they implying that we just made all of their comments up?
From what I've witnessed I'd have to conclude that their reality check bounced!
Pat A. Vesely ;-)
Proud Charter Member
Black Box Voting.org |
Kathleen Wynne
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Kathleen_wynne
Post Number: 125
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 3:22 am: |
|
To all,
Believe me, while it was an honor and an experience I will never forget to witness this event and to be able to videotape the entire process, it was also a heartbreaking experience as well. Seeing theory put into practice and realizing that what many have suspected for such a long time now is actually true, was sobering and sad. What we all witnessed was the harsh reality that our election process is in great trouble and in dire need of citizen oversight and involvement, not only in our elections themselves, but in the process of deciding the best solution to the numerous problems that plague it at so many levels.
I hope what was learned at the Leon County Elections Warehouse on December 13, 2005 will open the door and make way for the real election reform that so many citizens have been fighting for, for so, so long.
Our work is just beginning. Let's get to it!
Kathleen Wynne |
BBV Admin
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2947
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 4:01 am: |
|
Pat --
Thank you so very, very much. And to those who are new to this site, Pat Vesely has been on this issue from the start. When I released the Diebold source code into the wild for the first time on June 16, 2003, Pat Vesely was one of the technicians who analyzed it and provided perspective on what it contains. A snippet from his original comments on the Diebold code is in my book under the name "Goody Two Shoes" -- because in the beginning, we were being threatened for looking at the Diebold files and most of the technicians used pseudonyms to post their comments.
It is now acceptable to examine our voting system. In Chapter 12 of the Black Box Voting book (http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-12.pdf) you can get a feel for the very early perspectives of individuals who, operating under screen names, provided the first public examination of secret voting system code.
Thanks again, Pat.
Bev Harris |
Patricia Tavormina
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Patty
Post Number: 38
Registered: 04-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 6:21 am: |
|
I never said that I don't support your work.
I find the way these reports are written, to be misleading.
I'd like to know what shortcomings have not yet been addressed by this week's test. I see that this single question from my earlier post has not been answered. *This* is the sort of thing I am talking about. The implication is that the case is rock solid. If you're not trying to imply that, then please be straight about what has yet to be tested. Can someone help me out here?
If Diebold were to argue you on this issue, what points would they throw at you to continue to make the claim that their machines are safe?
My tone is not hostile. It is intended to give you some small feedback into how one part of the public reads these reports. I would greatly prefer to see the remaining shortcomings/etc, listed in each report as it comes out. Something like Bev's succinct paragraph here:
"Whereas the tests on May 26 proved that it is possible to manipulate voting machine results reports and proved that you can pre-stuff the ballot box, we still had not achieved proof of concept for the theory that you can falsify a zero report at the same time as pre-stuffing the ballot box, nor had we yet proved that the pre-stuffed ballot box will work properly after running ballots through the machine, nor had we yet proved that such altered data could be uploaded into GEMS without triggering error messages."
...for a report, as it comes out. It makes the report stronger, and it makes it clear that you are not trying to hide anything. |
| | |
