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: 
...
|
| (VA) (PA) 11/06 - Advanced Voting Sol... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 22 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 3, 2006 - 3:49 am: | 
|
Subject: Certification violations with Advanced Voting Solutions --
PENNSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA, MISSISSIPPI: Seeing deception by Advanced Voting Solutions Inc (AVS) of Counties in Virginia, PA and Mississipi that have purchased their Winvote DRE voting machine and software.
AVS have knowingly sold un-certified hardware and software.
They have been able to do this by providing many different versions of their voting software to their multiple customers, but have labelled each different version of software with the same version number to hide the fact that there are many different versions deployed.
For example, Virginia software is unique as it has many functions that are besboke to these counties.
In PA the software again is very different as they have state requirements that are unique.
In Mississipi, the software is totally different again due to the fact that the hardware deployed in Hinds County is totally different from the majority of hardware used by other customers.
AVS currently have several different builds of hardware deployed, just as with the software. However, all the different builds of hardware have not been tested or certified.
For example, AVS sold voting machines to counties in PA beginning of 2006.
They had Winvote "type 1" tested and approved for PA, and then delivered PA a completely different machine. The outer case and appearance is the same, however, the electronics under the hood are totally different. Different motherboard, processor etc.
This can be verified by contacting Wlye Labs as it states quite clearly on the BOM within the Technical Data Pack submitted to Wyle with the hardware that was tested, that the hardware was "type 1"
PA ran their elections earlier this year not knowing that they had been duped, and supplied with a totally different untested, un-certified voting machine.
The units in Hinds county Mississippi are totally different, and were built by a different company to the chinese company AVS currently use. For example they use Hard Drives as opposed to DOM's (Disk On Module). About 18 months ago it was dicovered that the batteries in these units were overheating.
AVS replaced the batteries for a different make of batterie, and changed the ENTIRE charging curcuit board for a completely different one. Did they test or submit the changes for re-certification ? NO, of course not. (This is a minor example)
Every change to software and hardware must be re-submitted for testing and certification. AVS have failed to do this despite making thousands of changes to the various different versions of software, and major changes to the hardware over the last few years.
The result is that there are many versions of the software, and many versions of the hardware out there in the field, about to go through yet another election, that are not tested or certified. VERY WORRYING !
AVS have hid behind the odd version of software and the odd version of hardware that had been tested historically, by badging all future versions of different software and hardware as the same.
Please read below, the latest report on ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS which gives a more in depth explanation of their very questionable conduct.
Regards
Brad
PS. One thing that isnt mentioned in the report is security of the Winvote, which has wireless functions.
AVS use off the shelf good old Microsoft. The wireless security is basically non existant, and anyone with a laptop or hand held can sit outside a polling station and "ping" the Winvote units wirelessly !
Obviously, you dont need to know anything about computers to connect your laptop to another wireless device (such as a Winvote) and send and recieve information between the two.
Very worrying to think that you can sit outside the polling station and run the election, and decide who wins yourself!
Yep, Winvote...The Best Democracy Money Can Buy !
ADVANCED VOTING FRAUD
A REPORT ON ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS INC
OVERVIEW:
THIS DOCUMENT EXPLAINS HOW ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS INC HAVE MANAGED TO SELL UN-CERTIFIED VOTING SOFTWARE AND UN-CERTIFIED VOTING HARDWARE (DRE VOTING MACHINES) TO JURISDICTIONS WITHIN PENNSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA AND MISSISSIPI, AND INCLUDES THE DIRECT TESTIMONY OF TWO RECENTLY DEPARTED EMPLOYEES OF THE COMPANY, TOGETHER WITH EXPLANATIONS AND CONTACT INFORMATION TO ENABLE THE VERIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
Advanced Voting Solutions Inc has defrauded the government and the tax paying voters of jurisdictions that have purchased their electronic voting equipment and election software since 2002.
These jurisdictions and voters placed their trust in Advanced Voting Solutions to provide them with election hardware and software that was certified to run elections in accordance with the Federal and State Legislations, together with the ITA, FEC and EAC.
Advanced Voting Solutions has flaunted this trust through the sales of voting hardware and software that was knowingly not certified to run elections.
These actions have been carried out knowingly and intently by Advanced Voting Solutions since 2002, and through the continual deceptions of the CEO Howard Van Pelt, the facts relating to certification, or rather “Lack of Certification” has been continually covered up by the company.
The President and CEO of Advanced Voting Solutions is Mr Howard Van Pelt. Mr Van Pelt is also a shareholder of Advanced Voting Solutions Inc.
Mr Van Pelt was formerly the CEO of Global Election Systems now known today as Diebold Election Systems.
Mr Van Pelt is also believed to still be a shareholder in Diebold Election Systems.
Advanced Voting Solutions Inc resides at:
2401 Internet Blvd
Suite 111
Frisco, Texas, 75034
Tel: (972) 731 8901 Fax: (972) 731 8924 Website: www.advancedvoting.com
The major shareholders and board of directors of Advanced Voting Solutions include and can be contacted at:
Mr Art Kania and Mr John Lasak of:
Kania, Lindner, Lasak & Feeney
Two Bala Plaza
Suite 525
Bala Cynwyd
Pennsylvania
PA 19004
Mr Art Kania: Tel (610) 667 3276 Fax: (610) 668 9676 email: ajkgolf@aol.com
Mr John Lasak: Tel (610) 667 3240 Fax: (610) 668 9676 email: jlasak@aol.com
VIRGINIA JURISDICTIONS:
Advanced Voting Solutions has sold electronic voting hardware and software to around 15 jurisdictions in Virginia that was not certified to run elections in accordance with the legislation.
Multiple different versions of election voting software and electronic voting machines were sold to these jurisdictions. Each version different from the next, and not certified.
Hundreds of changes have been made to these versions of software over the past few years, and it was required that each change be re certified by Advanced Voting Solutions. This also has never happened primarily because the software deployed was not certified in the first place.
Each version of voting software is given a different version number to differentiate it. However, Advanced Voting Solutions just applied the same version number to every release of software to hide the fact it was not certified.
Advanced Voting Solutions have provided DRE electronic voting machines to these jurisdictions within Virginia that were also not certified. Although all the DRE machines looked the same from the outside, under the hood there are many different versions of hardware deployed in Virginia that are not certified.
PENNSYLVANIA JURISDICTIONS:
Advanced Voting Solutions have recently in 2006 sold and delivered electronic voting equipment (DRE) and software to jurisdictions in PA.
The voting hardware that has been delivered in PA is not the voting hardware that was certified for these sales. (Please refer to the testimony of Ex AVS employee #2 as stated below)
An older version of hardware was certified at Wyle Labs in Huntsville, and then a new and completely different voting machine has been delivered to PA.
The only resemblance between the old hardware and the new hardware is the exterior case which is the same. What’s under the hood is completely different and was not certified. Different hardware components were used to build the new hardware.
This can easily be verified by comparing a voting unit as delivered to PA against the “Technical Documentation Pack” at Wyle Labs in Huntsville, which lists the “Bill Of Materials” used to build the hardware that was certified. (Wyle Labs contact details can be found towards the end of this document).
(The “Bill Of Materials” is basically a full list and description of every component used in the voting machine, mother board, processor, wireless card etc etc)
Advanced Voting Solutions hoped to certify the old hardware, deliver the new un-certified different voting machine hardware, and then attempt to certify the new hardware that they had delivered, at a later stage before anyone in PA noticed.
These un-certified voting machines were used to run the May 2006 Primaries in PA.
Advanced Voting Solutions has not only defrauded the state of PA and its tax paying voters, it also gained an unfair advantage on its primary competitor in the state, which is ES&S.
If Advanced Voting Solutions had acted within the rules and the law, then they would not have been able to gain certification of the new version of hardware that they were planning to sell to PA, in time to win the business from jurisdictions in PA. Therefore they put forward the old version of hardware which looks identical to the new version of hardware from the outside.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
It is very important to understand that currently Advanced Voting Solutions have many different versions of their voting software and DRE electronic voting machines deployed to their customers.
What this actually means is that, the voting software in Mississippi is completely different to the voting software in Pennsylvania, and both are completely different to the multiple different versions deployed in Virginia.
The same is also true of the DRE electronic voting machines deployed in Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
ALL the many different versions of voting software are required to be certified.
ALL the many different versions of DRE electronic voting machines are required to be certified.
TESTIMONY:
Testimony to follow from two ex employees of AVS explains how Advanced Voting Solutions have done this, and also explains how to verify this information.
Provided also is a contact list of companies and individuals that may be able to provide further details as to Advanced Voting Solutions conduct.
ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS PRESENT POSITION:
The company Advanced Voting Solutions Inc has now diminished to what can only be described as a skeleton crew with the departure of most of the staff including key individuals and third party support companies:
Individuals:
Debbie Olivierey
Debbie Pullins
Ingrid Giordano
John McLaurin
Mike Brown
Rodney Turner
Brian Finney
Trevor Jones
Michael Turner
Third party support companies:
Idessa uk
Enfocom International Corp
TESTIMONY BY EX ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS EMPLOYEE #1.
The first release of the Advanced Voting Solutions DRE electronic voting units, “WinVote” were built in Canada by a Mr Rob Benvie on behalf of Advanced Voting Solutions, and were delivered by AVS to Hinds County, Mississippi.
These voting machines delivered to Hinds County are not the voting machines that went through the 1990 certification round. AVS instead, chose to have one “golden unit” for certification, and the rest, cheap clones with different internal computer parts.
All AVS voting machines destined for Counties after Hinds County (there are approx 15 in Virginia) were then built by Galaxy, a Chinese company. These machines are completely different, and were never certified.
Each new version of these voting machines have different parts installed in them. Potentially 15 versions, one for each County. With regards to the voting software, every time a County requested a change be made to the voting software or a new account was acquired a new software version was built and deployed.
None of the different or changed voting software was ever certified !
AVS simply gave each version of software the same version number as the last version hoping nobody would notice.
With different hardware parts being used internally in the electronic voting machines, this required different software drivers needed to run the various different hardware components. This means that engineering change requests and updates for certification should have been submitted to the ITA.
This did not happen since the machines in question were never certified in the first place.
Howard Van Pelt, the President and CEO of Advanced Voting Solutions made all decisions with regards to hardware building and certification issues.
The actual voting Software that runs on the DRE voting machine “WinVote” was originally built by a Canadian company called Enfocom.
This voting software was only capable of running on the original voting machines built by Mr Rob Benvie which AVS had supplied to Hinds County, Mississippi.
Once AVS moved manufacture of their voting machines from Mr Rob Benvie to Galaxy in China, a new and different voting software application build was needed as the hardware built in China was completely different. Each time the CEO Howard Van Pelt negotiated to buy cheaper and cheaper components through the manufacturer, it required that the voting software and machine software drivers be changed. No certification of this different voting software was undertaken.
All new accounts (as detailed above) received the new and different Un-Certified Galaxy built voting units with the new and different, Un-Certified voting software installed.
Other major Un-Certified voting software versions also exist. For example, the Software changes made for Fairfax County, Virginia were significantly different than any of the other County accounts in Virginia.
The Fairfax County reporting system is completely unique, and no other account has the same reporting system installed. Again, no certification was carried out.
“Custom builds” (As provided to Fairfax County) were inserted in accounts that needed to have these custom changes. Potentialy 15 versions, one for each account, of the software, everytime an account requested a change or a new account was aquired a new software version was built. Again, no certification was carried out.
The CEO Howard Van Pelt was made aware on a daily basis of the consequences of his actions. His response was, we were told by him that this is a “you bet your company” approach to dealing with
problems. If we did not make the changes we would all lose our jobs.
The new Winvote machines use new drivers for the new hardware. This happened on a regular bases. Cheaper hardware was acquired, and the software needed to be updated. Again, no certification was carried out.
Fairfax County has documented the different versions of software, as well as the different versions of the hardware that they have received from AVS, different power supplies, WIFI controllers, and main mother board layout. It is believed that Fairfax County are currently investigating AVS along these lines.
Summary:
To sum up, AVS have duped their customers into buying what they believed to be certified voting hardware and software.
Sadly, this is not the case at all. AVS have lied and cheated their way in the market by knowingly selling un certified voting equipment and software, and have continued to do so.
Howard Van Pelt the CEO has duped the investors of AVS for years.
The Texas office lease is expired and hasn’t been renewed, and they have an extension to December 2006.
Most the staff have left, and those that are left are in the process of job hunting.
No more funding, no offices past December, little to no staff, no new sales prospects, no software support.
REPORT BY EX ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS EMPLOYEE #2.
Re:Non Qualified Hardware Delivered to Pennsylvania Counties in 2006 by Advanced Voting Solutions Inc.
Voting Machine Hardware certification at Wyle Labs, Huntsville by AVS for delivery to Pennsylvania Counties 2006.
The Advanced Voting Solutions “WINvote” voting machine hardware used to test for hardware certification for delivery to PA was a previous version of hardware known as Type 1.
This is not the voting machine hardware that AVS delivered to PA Counties.
The Bill of Material submitted as part of the Technical Data Package to Ciber/Wyle Labs in January 2006 clearly states Type 1 WINvote Hardware.
There was talk about not being able to manufacture the Type 1 hardware in the future as VIA (the motherboard manufacturer) had advised Advanced Voting Solutions that it no longer planned to manufacturer the motherboard.
The testing time in Huntsville was shortened using the Type 1 hardware.
A new version of the hardware using a completely new mother board (and
other changes) was planned. The new version of hardware was not used
for testing at this time due not having sufficient quantities to work
with during testing and also to not add time delays in the Pennsylvania
certification process.
Putting this new hardware through would have extended the test period by a month to six weeks or more. In addition it was still not clear if the new hardware had stabilized.
The plan at the time was to submit the new hardware right away after the Pennsylvania certification approval was given. But prior to units being fielded in Pennsylvnia.
In April 2006 the manufacturers rep from Galaxy Commutec, George Seebach, communicated that they were having a problem loading the existing software onto the new un-certified hardware at the factory in China. The hardware was being built for shipment to Pennsylvania.
Rob MacDonald the Director of Technology for Advanced Voting Solutions was reminded that this new version of the hardware was not approved by the EAC (Elections Advisory Commission) and that they should commence testing with Ciber/Wyle labs right away. (Which they did not do)
Rob MacDonald contacted Miles Zhou from Enfocom, who had written the original voting software. They produced a new version of the voting software and a new software version was compiled to run on the new hardware.
The hardware differences would be easy to demonstrate between what was passed by Wyle Labs at certification for PA, and what was actually delivered to the Counties in PA.
Place side by side A typical Type 1 WINvote unit, as can be found in any of the Virginia Counties and then one unit as delivered to
a county in Pennsylvania. Ask that they disassemble the two units side
by side.
Without having to even refer to the Bill Of Materials as lodged at Wyle Labs in Huntsville, the differences would be immediately evident to the eye. You don’t have to be technically minded to play “spot the difference”
Differences that would be noted by eye:
-interior metal work
-motherboard
-different processor speed
-on board wireless local area network versus PCMCIA on the type 1 units
-revised galaxy designed interface board
These changes would be considered major. Although the exterior cases are the same for the two units, underneath the hood they are two completely different voting machines.
Summary
The hardware delivered in Pennsylvania and subsequently used in the May 2006 State Primary elections was not and is not approved by the EAC.
PA state law requires that all software and hardware used in elections in Pennsylvania must be EAC approved.
This is a major concern since State Officials as well as county customers believe that the voting hardware that was delivered, is in fact one in the same with what was approved in Huntsville in January 2006.
This is not the case at all.
PA officials need to contact Wyle Labs in Huntsville and Fairfax County Virginia to send a voting machine from PA and a voting machine from any of the customers in Virginia to Wyle Labs to be compared against each other and also against what Wyle certified.
It is believed that Advanced Voting Solutions have recently submitted the un certified voting hardware and software to Wyle and Ciber Labs to begin the certification process in an attempt to cover up their activities prior to the upcoming election.
The version of voting software that was originally delivered to PA has since undergone many changes. It is further believed that these changes have not been certified. It should be checked by contacting Ciber Labs to compare software versions, functionality and source code differences.
CONTACT LIST FOR FURTHER VERIFICATION OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION:
CIBER
Huntsville Alabama
Contact: Shawn Southworth, Director
Lead Engineer: Jack Cobb
Tel: 1-256-882-6900
(Ciber Labs are the testing lab for Advanced Voting Solutions electronic voting software applications, through which “certification” is gained.
WYLE LABORATORIES
7800 Highway 20 West
Huntsville, Alabama
35806
Contact: Bobby Hardy (Elections System Specialist)
(Wyle Labs are the testing lab for Advanced Voting Solutions electronic voting machine hardware (DRE)
GALAXY COMMUTECH LTD (in HONG KONG)
Room 907
5-21 Pak Tin Par St
Tsuen Wan NT Hong Kong
Tel:
Fax: 852-2414-2938
Contact: Thomas Lee
(Galaxy manufacture all of Advanced Voting Solutions DRE electronic voting machines)
GEORGE SEEBACH
Calgary Alberta
Tel: 403-238-2172
Email: gs@blaik.com
(Seebach is Advanced Voting Solutions Rep for Galaxy Commutech who manufactures AVS,s DRE electronic voting machine hardware in Hong Kong)
IDESSA UK LTD (in UNITED KINGDOM)
609 Stretford Road
Manchester
England
United Kingdom
M16 0QA
Contact: Christopher Povey / John Morison (Directors)
Tel: 0161-877-4114
Email: chris.povey@idessa.com john.morrison@idessa.com
(Idessa were Advanced Voting Solutions third party software support company. It is believed that Idessa is currently suing Advanced Voting Solutions for breach of contract)
ENFOCOM INTERNATIONAL CORP (in CALGARY)
2915 19th St NW
Calgary Alberta
Tel: 403-291-5500
Fax: 403-291-5508
Contact: Herb Fensury (CEO)
Email: Herbert.fensury@enfocom.com
(Enfocom were a third party software support company for Advanced Voting Solutions prior to Idessa. It is believed that Enfocom may also have grounds against Advanced Voting Solutions for breach of contract) |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3368
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 3, 2006 - 4:15 pm: |
|
Bradley,
Welcome and thank you for this outstanding compendium of information. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 3
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, November 4, 2006 - 9:31 am: |
|
Catherine
Can anything be done prior to next Tuesday ?
I have sent the information to the counties using AVS's Winvote in Virginia, PA and Mississippi about a week ago, and as I expected, they seem to be trying to ignore the information !?
I do know for a fact that Fairfax County, Virginia were already well aware that they were using un-certified voting software and hardware supplied by AVS, and were hoping that they could get through Nov elections without any bad PR.
In fact, they had an internal investigation running in order to try and make sense of the BS they were getting from AVS.
Unfortunatley, the person heading up that investigation in the county left to take a job with Diebold.
I do however know that Fairfax have not renewed their maintainance contract with AVS.
I sent the information to all the election officials in each County that has Winvote......Not one single response or question has come back from any of them !
I can only assume that they want to keep a lid on it, and try and get through the election, as changing to paper ballots at this stage would be a big nightmare for them.
However, this is just simply not good enough !
any advice or thoughts ?
Brad |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3375
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, November 4, 2006 - 11:15 am: |
|
quote:I can only assume that they want to keep a lid on it, and try and get through the election, as changing to paper ballots at this stage would be a big nightmare for them.
However, this is just simply not good enough !
I agree with your assessment. Continue to do as much as you can to get the facts to your local media, neighbors etc. And keep up the pressure on your local officials. See if you can get any local media to pose your questions to the officials.
We have to expose the stonewalling and illegal behavior wherever it occurs, and give public appreciation of those officials who are supportive of transparent and fair election administration. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 7
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 5, 2006 - 7:10 am: |
|
Catherine
Bev was on to something here, please see the link below to one of Bev's previous posts about Advanced Voting Solutions:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/33015.html?1162726457
However, I believe Bev might have had more luck getting to the truth had she been aware of the full facts about how AVS have been manipulating and side stepping the certification process, as outlined in my report.
If you combine the information from Bev's previous string with my information (which is totally first hand), it shouldnt be too difficult to kick up a fuss.
Its realy worrying that AVS have gotten away with murder for so long, and are undermining the integrity, and the spirit of voting !
I need help to bring them to justice.
I have contacted local media in the hope that an investigative gournalist will ask some questions.
I am not aware of any action as of today. I think the problem is that the media have no real clue how to investigate if a voting company is certified or not ? After all, there is a learning curve involved for anyone not involved in the elections arena, to be able to understand the process before even attemting to question it.
The same is pretty much true for the individuals within the counties like the election officials. I dont believe they have a clue how to go about a proper investigation either.
I imagine they would just ask AVS if they are up to date with certification, which AVS will without doubt say that they are.
This has actually worked for AVS on a number of occasions because the counties dont actually want to hear anything else from AVS, and automatically take their word as its the easiest thing to do, as opposed to calling an election into question etc !
I had hoped that by contacting BBV, that you guys could help me bring Advanced Voting Solutions to justice. Lord knows, they deserve it.
Also, off the top of your head, do you or any of your colleagues know if there are any rules about the location of manufacture for electronic voting machines used in the US ?
The reason I ask, is that AVS have all their voting machines manufactured on the cheap in Hong Kong by a company called Galaxy.
Im sure I remember some legislation on this subject, but the details escape my memory ?
Brad |
Christopher B. Radan
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Thearcher
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 5, 2006 - 9:13 am: |
|
Have not yet verified that Kania et al are major shareholders in AVS, but since attorney Kania is an alumnus of my college, I have verified that his contact information is accurate.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, he was a substantial political contributor ($20K+) to both PA and national candidates as of the 2000 election cycle (opensecrets.org). You won't need to guess which political party. Seems like being a major share- or stake-holder in any electronic voting machine technology, methodology, or concern requires substantial partisan affiliation as a prerequisite. Absolutely dismaying. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, November 5, 2006 - 12:11 pm: |
|
Christopher
Kania has been a major shareholder and principle funder of Advanced Voting Solutions since the company changed from Shoup.
There are also other high profile individuals involved. One in particular I believe was Bush's campaign manager.
I think overall, the company has burned about $7.5Million in investment funds since 2002.
He has also been fully aware of the status of AVS's deceptive manipulation and side stepping of certification, and by being aware of the situation but choosing to go along with it, in my view he is as guilty as Van Pelt when it comes down to brass tacks. Which in this case happens to be defrauding the government and the tax paying voters by selling them un-tested, un-certified software and hardware for millions of dollars.
In fact, he and Howard Van Pelt the CEO are the entire driving force behind masterminding the companies direction.
There are other members of the board of course, but they are left out in the dark when it comes to the crunch, and any decision making about the company.
Kania is a foolish, foolish individual who believes that his law firm with their big profile law contacts can spin the company AVS out of trouble. Bad move !
Also Kania is totally controlling the company from the financial perspective. The company is now nothing more than an empty shell with hardly any staff left at all.
They have been trying to sell the company for the last few years before time caught up with their wrong doing.
However, every initially interested party that came along, saw through the smoke screen.
The last interested party was the Spanish company Indra would you believe.
I fully expect AVS to close its doors and turn off the lights after this next election.
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 12
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 5:00 am: |
|
CONCLUSIVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE AGAINST ADVANCED VOTING SOLUTIONS.
The attached PDF contains photographic evidence against Advanced Voting Solutions deceptions relating to the testing and certification of their electronic voting machine "Winvote"
Bev, Catherine, BBV Team, I need your help to get this info out there !
Voters in Virginia and PA please take notice and lobby your elected officials not to use these machines on Tuesday ! They are NOT tested, and they are NOT approved !
Brad
|
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3388
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 6:13 am: |
|
Great work, Brad.
Hopefuly Bev will be able to respond to you quickly. Have you tried to contact some of the attorneys who have experience re: voting machines? (Lowell Finley? Paul Lehto? and there are surely others. . .) |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 16
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 6:26 am: |
|
Catherine
I dont know who to contact....I was hoping you guys would know, and be able to get the information to the correct people.
I could flap around forever and still not get to the right people.
I know my limitations....Im great on the technology, but not so hot on the legal stuff.
This is why I contacted you.
Thanks
Brad |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3390
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 6:28 am: |
|
I hope Jim or Bev can get back to you quickly. I think BBV has worked with both Lowell Finlay and Paul Lehto so I'd think it might be good to try to reach them. They might also have some contacts in the states in question. |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 101
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 8:51 am: |
|
Brad,
Get this to VoterAction.org. Go to the "Contact" page at http://www.voteraction.org
VoterActions's Lowell Finley is involved in Pennsylvania legal actions, some of them with regard to certification issues.
One of the issues here is that there are inconsistencies in state requirements of NASED certification. Mississippi, for example, doesn't require NASED cert, and actually doesn't seem to have state cert either, so its like selling voting machines into the Wild, Wild, West.
Pennsylvania requires state certification but not necessarily NASED certification. What is your source that Pennsylvania requires EAC cert? I couldn't find that they do.
Regardless, if the state of Pennsylvania certified one thing and another thing was delivered, you may have them there.
Virginia is murky as heck when it comes to divulging whether it needs NASED/EAC cert or not. I've been given both yes and no answers there.
Yes, Advanced Voting Solutions is made up of many of the old guys from Global Election Systems (not Diebold, most of them left for AVS before the Diebold purchase). Interestingly, though, Advanced Voting Solution's Howard Van Pelt owns a home or at least, is in a homeowners association in OMAHA -- where there is a large ES&S office and a tiny Diebold office. I find that fact curious indeed. The cross-pollinations between these companies are intriguing, and are another reason we need to get rid of secrecy and privatization altogether in the elections industry.
This needs more time than I have today or tomorrow, and nothing will be done about it before the election. However, if you can pinpoint for me every county that uses Advanced Voting Solutions in the three states, there is something I can do behind the scenes to move this along a little bit. E-mail them to me privately or post them here. |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 1
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 10:57 am: |
|
Below is a list from the Virginia State Board of Elections (http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/Election_Information/Voting_Systems_Ballots/Inde x.asp)
of the cities and counties in Virginia that are using the WinVote machines.
You may find the contact information for the election registrar and electoral board of each county at
http://www.sbe.state.va.us/cms/Voter_Information/Local_Voter_Registration_Office s/Index.asp.
Accomack
Appomattox
Arlington
Bedford County
Botetourt
Brunswick
Buckingham
Caroline
Craig
Dinwiddie
Fairfax City
Fairfax County
Floyd
Fluvanna
Goochland
Henrico
Henry
Lunenburg
Mecklenburg
Middlesex
Montgomery
Orange
Powhatan
Richmond
Roanoke
Southampton
Spotsylvania
Warren
Unfortunately, it appears that Virginia does not require NASED/EAC certifications for the voting machines in use; it
merely requires that the State Board of Elections certify the equipment, as indicated
from the Virginia HAVA State Plan Amendment 2006 (http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/documents/HAVA/Hava_State_Plan_Amendment_2006.pd f):
"Voting Systems
The Code of Virginia (hereinafter referred to as “Code”) requires that the SBE certify any mechanical or
electronic voting system or equipment before any locality may purchase (or lease) the system or
equipment (Code §24.2-625 et seq.). The certification procedure adopted by the three-member Board
(hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) first requires certification by an Independent Testing Authority
(ITA) and then Virginia-specific hardware and software testing, financial certification and field-testing.
Virginia retains a consultant well versed in the technology and issues surrounding the implementation of
new voting technology; the consultant conducts the hardware and software tests and makes
recommendations. The Virginia Department of Accounts reviews all financial documents." |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 21
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 10:58 am: |
|
Bev
Thanks. I will be sending the info to Lowell Finley today.
I hear what you are saying about Mississippi.
Virginia is indeed a little confused. Murky or not, they are sat on a bunch of voting machines spread throughout the state that have several different versions of software on them when there should just be the one version, and several different versions of voting machine hardware, again when there should be just the one version.
PA: I was told by two AVS employee's that PA required EAC Cert.
PA is easy in comparison to Virginia. PA thought they were taking delivery of a voting machine that had been tested at Wyle Labs, and made AVS sign a document stating that the hardware that was tested was the hardware they would recieve....AVS delivered to them a completeley different voting machine that was un-tested !
Yes, interesting about Van Pelt ? His home is in McKinney, Texas and he spends a lot of time in New Mexico where his roots are. Had no idea about OMAHA.
However, I do know that he and Bobby Erosovich recently made a sales pitch to the rest of the board at AVS for the pair of them to take full control of AVS.
Which seemed odd at the time, since Bobby fired Van Pelt at Global and ended up with his Job so I hear !!
I believe Van Pelt is also still a shareholder in Diebold.
This year, when AVS were not able to service the sales of new units to other counties, Van Pelt was reported to have "funnelled" those sales prospects through Diebold.
Please find below a list of counties in Virginia and PA that have the Winvote from AVS, together with number of units supplied and a FAX number.
(Sorry about the format, I copied and pasted it in)
It is my belief that there is too much secrecy in the industry, and the industry itself seems to be controlled by a handfull of individuals who all have their hands in each others pockets ?
Brad
Virginia Counties:
Locality: Equipment: # Units
Accomack WINVOTE 58 757 824 0525
Appomattox WINVOTE 34 434 352 4409
Arlington WINVOTE 306 703 228 3659
Botetourt WINVOTE 72 540 473 8330
Brunswick WINVOTE 30 434 848 9276
Buckingham WINVOTE 27 434 969 2060
Caroline WINVOTE 45 804 633 0362
Craig WINVOTE 25 540 564 6662
Dinwiddie WINVOTE 42 804 469 4503
Fairfax WINVOTE 1206 703 324 2205
Floyd WINVOTE 21 540 745 9390
Fluvanna WINVOTE 29 434 589 6383
Goochland WINVOTE 39 804 556 6323
Henrico WINVOTE 793 804 501 5081
Henry WINVOTE 98 276 638 8278
Highland WINVOTE 8 540 468 2012
Lunenburg WINVOTE 24 434 696 3952
Mecklenburg WINVOTE 50 434 738 6104
Middlesex WINVOTE 24 804 758 3950
Montgomery WINVOTE 114 540 381 6811
Nelson WINVOTE 11 434 263 8601
Orange WINVOTE 40 540 672 0093
Powhatan WINVOTE 44
Richmond WINVOTE 15 804 646 7848
Roanoke WINVOTE 133 540 853 1025
Southampton WINVOTE 35 757 653 9401
Spotsylvania WINVOTE 144 540 582 2604
Warren WINVOTE 60 540 635 5456
York WINVOTE 15 757 890 3449
Bedford WINVOTE 10 540 586 8358
Lynchburg WINVOTE 24 434 947 2798
Richmond WINVOTE 481 804 333 3408
PA Counties:
Wayne WINVOTE 570 253 5432
Lackawanna WINVOTE
Northampton WINVOTE 610 559 3736
Mississipi
Hinds County WINVOTE |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 22
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 11:02 am: |
|
Thanks Bill
Even though Virginia only require testing at ITA, this has still not occurred for the many different versions they have.
Virginia believe they have one single version of software, and one single type of voting machine.
This is not the case, they actually have several of each !
Brad |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 2
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 12:01 pm: |
|
Brad,
Thank you for all of the valuable information that you have posted in this thread. There are many of us who would not have had this information if not for you. 
What are your thoughts on forming citizen-based certification teams (ITAs) in various jurisdictions? It's probably too late to do it for this election cycle, but do you think that it would be a viable option in future?
~Bill |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 24
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 6 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 12:10 pm: |
|
Bill
My pleasure, I hope you can put the information to good use. If you can think of any information that I have overlooked, please feel free to ask.
I think forming citizens ITA teams is a very good idea, although Im not sure how that would be accepted by government or indeed the election vendors.
They are guarded enough as it is now, even with Labs like Ciber and Wyle involved.
There are probably counties like the counties in Virginia that retain third party groups though ?
Im sure there must be more.
Seems like a viable option to me
Brad |
Sean & Lesa Plunkett
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Sean__lesa_plunkett
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 3:36 pm: |
|
Hello,
I live in Roanoke County in Virginia. I got this pdf from the RoanonokeCountyVA.gov website:
 RoanokeCountyVA.gov tutorial to WinVote
WINvote1.pdf (75.1 k) |
The screen on the WinVote in the pic says: Version 1.5.4, is that a fake picture in the pdf? |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 26
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 4:05 pm: |
|
Sean & Lesa
No I dont think its fake.
I would be interested to know when the training guide was produced and put on the website though ?
Open up the PDF that you downloaded, click file and select properties, and look at the date it was authored please.
Brad |
Travis Rogers
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Soundg
Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 4:17 pm: |
|
Wow Brad. The one with the WiFi card is really scary. Especially if it is running any kind of Windows OS. This incident blows certification OUT of the water.
When were these photos taken and were they taken by you?
Thanks for sharing. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 28
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 4:45 pm: |
|
Hi Travis
Yes, the photos were taken today.
The voting machine with the Wifi card is running Microsoft Windows XP.
The realy scary thing Travis, is that all the counties that have these and other machines from AVS, obviously have no clue whats under the hood !
Whats even more scary, is that according to what AVS tells its customers, both of the units in the picture are the same ! NOT !
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 29
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 12 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 5:19 pm: |
|
Bev
Sorry, one question I forgot to answer for you earlier:
No, Advanced Voting Solutions do not currently have any customers in Texas depite being located there.
Also just to confirm, the information has been sent to Lowell Finley earlier today.
Lets hope he can do something with it. Thanks to you and your team for the help and advice.
Lets see where it goes from hear
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 30
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 5:23 pm: |
|
Christopher B Radan
Have you turned up anything else on Kania and Co ?
Brad |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 112
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 5:47 pm: |
|
This is a hot thread. I am following it, but juggling quite a few things. If I forget to let you know what I did with the info you provided, ask me Wednesday to remind me.
You folks are demonstrating the very best of American citizenship. |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 4
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 7:45 pm: |
|
Hi Brad,
Regarding the AVS systems and WiFi... On the website of Fairfax County, VA, they do have a page about the equipment: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/winvote_equip.htm .
Keep in mind that this voting machine information on the county website is the same as it has been since 2002.
They mention in the General FAQs (http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/FAQ_votingmachine_repl.pdf) that the machines use 802.11b. Fairfax County does say that these internal wireless cards are disabled while the polls are open. I think it may be a good idea to confirm that in practice during the day tomorrow:
"The wireless LAN complies with IEEE 802.11b standards for wireless systems and utilizes a
128-bit encryption Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) protocol which was thoroughly tested by
the ITA’s during the certification process. The wireless LAN is used to simplify the process of
opening the polls on election morning and closing the machines and accumulating the results
after the poll close. It is not used while ballots are being cast by voters. If the wireless system
fails to work the machines can be opened and closed individually and results accumulated using
the removable back-up USB media."
The issue is that WEP has been proven to be fairly easy to crack, even by a 13 year-old script-kiddie.
~Bill |
Sean & Lesa Plunkett
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Sean__lesa_plunkett
Post Number: 3
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, November 6, 2006 - 10:16 pm: |
|
Hi Brad,
I did what you said but it just gave me the created and modified date (11/06/06) of when I saved it. That would be to ironic if they put it on there the same day I decided to look for it. Here is the link to the page from which you can download the pdf.
http://www.roanokecountyva.gov/Departments/Elections/HowToVote/
The actual pdf link is: http://www.roanokecountyva.gov/www.RoanokeCountyVA.gov/ResourceItem.aspx?strURL= /Resources/www.roanokecountyva.gov/Departments/Elections/Docs/WINvote1.pdf
--Lesa Plunkett |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 31
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 7:30 am: |
|
Bev
Thanks again for your assistance.
Touch base with you Wednesday
Brad |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:01 am: |
|
Has anyone been able to see if the memory cards are blank before voting starts?
What kinds of tests can be done or were done before the start of the election?
(Message edited by neutralsam on November 07, 2006) |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 32
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:02 am: |
|
Bill
Thanks for contributing this.
Bev, RE: Virginia, this link below that Bill provided from Fairfax website states that they require FEC and NASED together with state approved ITA's. Although it was produced in 2002, if its incorrect, it shouldnt be on the website.
(http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/FAQ_votingmachine_repl.pdf)
Bill,
With regards to the wireless function. Someone just needs to take a laptop or handheld today and search for wireless devices at the polling location....I think they would be surprised at what they sniff out !
They do indeed use the wireless ability at the set up of the election, and close of polls too.
The close of polls is the best time any attacker would opt for, the idiots !
Its the time when no voters are looking at the screens etc.....This is the time when all the Winvotes are set to connect to each other in the polling location by wireless and transmit all the tallies to one single machine....This is of course the most logical time any attacker would easily be able to gain access and control over the votes.
After, all the votes are transferred to a single unit, the results are are transmitted by modem.
As you say Bill, the wireless protocols and security aspect is virtually non existant, and is almost an after thought for the sake of being able to mention it....I agree with your comments about a 13 year old being able to bypass it.
Thanks again for your input Bill
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 33
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:03 am: |
|
Sean & Lesa
Oh well, it was worth a go.
Thanks
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 34
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:07 am: |
|
Ed Metis,
Which memory cards, the voter activation smart cards or the memory sticks that store secondary vote tallies in each machine ?
Its an interesting subject either way Ed.
Brad |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 18
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:25 am: |
|
Like the one that was hack in the documentary.
Plus once the machines get to the poling place are they tested? what kinds of tests do they do? |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 36
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:44 am: |
|
Ed
Im not sure how it will be possible to inspect the memory cards. Both the elections officials, poll workers and election vendors are very obviously on the alert right now.
Its a very good question though, and I guess pressure should be brought, to be able to inspect random memory cards for corruption, and or previous old data that should not be there.
Random logic and accuracy tests should be conducted, but I suppose very rarely do once the voting machines are in the polling places.
Pollworkers set up the machines, and in most cases check that the unit is functioning correctly, check the counters on screen and where applicable print out a zero tally. The more diligent poll workers carry out further tests like screen callibration etc.
Im not saying I agree with current processes.....some of them obviously end up in disenfranchising voters.
Brad |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 5
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 9:04 am: |
|
Hi Brad,
After voting today, we drove around about a dozen polling places in Fairfax County, looking for open wireless adapters in the voting machines. I have to say that I found none; the only wireless networks that I could see were your standard WAPs, and the MAC addresses had the first three octets of Linksys and Belkin (not anything else) so these were the networks of people who just happen to live near the polling places. I don't know what octets to look for in the WinVote machines though -- maybe I'll find out later today. 
The one thing that we noticed in this election (and the 2004 election) is that the poll worker supervising the machines had to insert a card into the machine before each person voted. Apparently, ,this is standard practice for these machines, at least in Fairfax County, as indicated by step 1 in these instructions: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/AVS_web_instr.pdf. I find this a bit concerning, although I don't know enough about these machines at this point to be qualified to comment. Can anybody who knows more about them who comment on this?
Thank you for pointing out that FFX County requires FEC and NASED together with state approved ITA's. I missed that when I read the FAQs. This is an issue that we will raise with the county Electoral Board.
Thank you,
Bill |
JOHNb
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jcmbowman
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 9:21 am: |
|
Brad, Sean, and Lesa -
The PDF you posted has an internal creation and modification date of 12/30/2003. The Author of the document is listed as "Linda Lindberg". In addition, there are two custom fields defined - one is "Company" and is set as "DTS", the other is "Source Modified" and is set to "D:20031230202118".
If you're interested in finding this information for yourself to verify it, open up the PDF in Acrobat and select "Document Properties" (at least that's what the menu item is called on my version of the software) This information is encoded into the PDF at its time of creation and does not change no matter where it is transferred, downloaded, or copied to. Hope this helps. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 38
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 9:36 am: |
|
Bill
Looks like Fairfax have pulled their socks up !
Better luck later.
If you find any Bill, it will be identified as a winvote unit. Get as close to the polling place as humanly possible, (Inside if possible) the componants, especially the wireless cards in a Winvote are cheap and crappy at best.
On the other hand, Fairfax is amongst the counties that were contacted and emailed about 10 days ago with all the info in the report, and warnings about the short commings of the winvote....perhaps they took notice ?
Anyway, best of luck Bill, and thanks for spending the time and taking the trouble to try.
Yeah, Fairfax and other counties have chose to have the pollworker activate your vote process.
Its not required, they could simply burn you a card, hand it to you, and point to the voting unit you are to vote on.
They did burn the card prior to inserting it didnt they Bill ?
Yeah, Bev said she couldnt get a straight answer on the subject of NASED FEC etc.
If they perport to have FEC, NASED and a state ITA's for Winvote.......Not in a million years Bill, this is just comforting propaganda from Fairfax.
Fairfax knew 3 months ago that they were not certified, and had an investigation running against AVS from that point on.
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 39
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 9:42 am: |
|
Bill, anyone in Virginia
Quick, anyone voting today in Virginia, please write down the software version on the front screen of the Winvote.
Sean & Lesa, have you voted yet ? if not can you make a note of the software version number on the Winvote.
Please see Sean and Lesa's PDF a few posts ago for where the version number is displayed.
Bill any chance you can call into a polloing location and ask a pollworker to let see the software version number.
Guys.....This is realy important.
Thanks so much
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 40
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 9:48 am: |
|
JohnB
Thanks for the info, and as I suspected the dates match up with a theory of mine concerning the documents.
I need to have the software version number from a winvote anywhere in Virgina today.
Hope someone can help !!
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 41
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 10:08 am: |
|
Voters in Virginia, PA and Mississipi
Please write down the software version displayed on the front screen of the Winvote voting unit used in the election.
Better still take a photo....I think Advanced Voting Solutions have just publically hung themselves !
I think you will have to note the software version number prior to the pollworker inserting the card as the screen will change.
Bev, any way you can place a call or two to any contacts you have that might be able to obtain this info ?
Brad |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 23
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 10:46 am: |
|
I went ahead and used the Electronic Voting machine. ESS IVotronic SN#5118237
From Matthew Jarfi in Mississippi
Is this what you wanted?
(Message edited by neutralsam on November 07, 2006) |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 6
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 10:51 am: |
|
Brad,
Unfortunately, I didn't document the version number when I was voting, so I can try to call on a polling location to see the version number; they may or may not let me. We'll see.
I sent an email to the Fairfax County Registrar regarding the NASED cert issue (see below). I will post the response as soon as it is received.
~Bill
---- EMAIL TEXT -----
Dear Ms. Harris, or whomever it may concern,
In reviewing the County's document entitled "Voting Machine Replacement - Frequently Asked Questions" (http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/FAQ_votingmachine_repl.pdf), I noticed the following paragraph, which implies that the voting machines in Fairfax County were chosen from among those that were NASED certified:
"After a voting system becomes NASED qualified, the Virginia State Board of Elections
conducts its own certification, employing another ITA to ensure that the voting equipment
will meet Virginia laws and standards. As part of the Virginia certification process, voting
machines must be tested in an actual election. After machines have received state certification,
the localities may then begin their own selection process."
While I did see these machines listed on the Virginia SBE website, I did not find these machines listed in the NASED certification list itself (http://www.nased.org/NASED%20Qualified%20Voting%20Systems%20122205.pdf).
The questions that I have regarding the certification are:
1. Why does the FAQ on the county's web site claim that these machines are NASED certified when this is clearly not true?
2. Is this a Virginia issue, since the machine purchase choices were provided by the state?
3. If this is a Virginia issue, who do I contact at the SBE to provide an explanation for this discrepancy?
Additionally, I would like to know why the poll workers have to insert a card into each machine before each use, what is the purpose of this card, and what are on these cards before, during, and after polling hours?
Thank you in advance for your assistance with these questions.
--- END OF EMAIL --- |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 44
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
Thanks Ed
Unfortunatley not....Its to do with Advanced Voting Solutions "Winvote" voting machine, not ES&S.
But once again, thank you for your efforts and diligence.
Brad |
John Dobbs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdobbs
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 11:29 am: |
|
Brad,
My daughter is going to get the version # for you around 3:15 E.S.T. Do you need anything else from the machine?
(I already voted this morning)
John D. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 47
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 11:47 am: |
|
John
Very much appreciated.
Just the software version number. A digital photo of it would be fantastic.
Where is your daughter voting today ?
Thanks again
Brad |
John Dobbs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdobbs
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 12:26 pm: |
|
She lives in Burke Virginia which is part of Fairfax County. I just called her cell, and no answer. As soon as I find out, I'll post it. |
ed metis
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Neutralsam
Post Number: 26
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 12:49 pm: |
|
Whats the law regarding taking pictures in a polling place?
Someone got chewed out by staff for not trusting the system.
see
bad experience--taking photos in poll...
(Message edited by neutralsam on November 07, 2006) |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 57
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Bill
I just caught your post....Well done !
Lets see if you get a response ?
Thanks for your help and assistance Bill
Brad |
John Dobbs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdobbs
Post Number: 3
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 5:36 pm: |
|
Brad..
Version 1.5.4
I couldn't catch her in time to ask her to take a pic. |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 10
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 5:41 pm: |
|
Interesting thing when viewing the Roanoke City (VA) results so far. There are votes for the senate and congressional races, but none at all for the constitutional amendments. (from: http://sbe.virginiainteractive.org/nov2006/770.htm#141)
I have the screenshot of this at http://theness.org/bbvImg/RoakokeCity_2026.JPG
I don't know if this means anything, but I was under the impression that the votes for all seats and issues were tabulated at the same time. |
Bill Mohler
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bimo_dude
Post Number: 11
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Also, I had written a Perl script to track the results, by precinct, from sbe.virginiainteractive.org (it was to run once every 10 minutes). When I wrote this script a couple of hours ago, there were links on the virginiainteractive site to the precinct and locality results pages.
Once the polls closed at 7:00 PM, I went to run the script, and the site had changed format; the links were gone. It changed again to have HTML forms with dropdown menus to select precincts, so the information is still there. I do not have enough time to change the script before most of the results are in.
This is unfortunate, because it would have allowed us to look for any counts going down from one update to the next.  |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 66
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 7:10 pm: |
|
John
Great job !
The relevance of this is important...The version 1.5.4 has not changed as far as the documentation and what is displayed on the DRE screen for the past 3 years
I happen to know in absolute detail, every change that has been made to Fairfax software for the last two years.
Major updates and changes to their reports section, and security alone have been made this year.....and AVS are still trying to badge the software as the same version !
John, you have just assisted in nailing AVS and Fairfax for use of un tested and un approved software !
Bev, hope your catching all this ?
Thanks again John, will be catching up on Wednesday, travelling right now.
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 67
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 7:15 pm: |
|
Hey Bill
Certainly sounds worthy of further investigation.
Tabulation is generally at the same time...sounds odd ?
Yes, shame about the reports on the site.
Thanks again for your input Bill
Brad |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 149
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - 8:44 pm: |
|
Keeping a version number the same with the software changing is fraud.
Can anyone get their hands on a User Manual of any version at all? There's something I'd like to see in there. Also, what do you know about the central tally system for the Advance Voting Solutions system? What the name of it, anybody know? |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 68
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 1:18 am: |
|
Hi Bev
http://www.roanokecountyva.gov/Departments/Elections/HowToVote/
Here is a link to a PDF on Roankes web site as provided by Sean & Lesa above.
It clearly shows the version number to be 1.5.4
"Linda Lindberg" created the document on 12/30/2003 according to Johnb,s scrutiny of the PDF as above.
Go on the web link, open the PDF, click on file, select properties to see the author and date created info.
As above, John Dobbs very kindly had his daughter take note of the version number Tuesday when voting on the Winvote in Fairfax.....It is still 1.5.4 !
As originally mentioned in my first post of this thread, AVS just kept making release after release of different software to all these accounts, and badged every release with the same version number over and over again.
The PDF on the website with the 2003 date is a quick evidence proof that the version number has not changed in nearly 3 years despite many, many new versions being deployed after 2003.
The software was virtually re-written in 2004, and I know that for an absolute fact....so does Virginia!
The software in Virginia is un-tested and un-approved, AVS know this, Virginia know this, and yet it is counting our votes !
Bev, the system for central tally is called "WINRESULTS"
Will try for user and training manual asap.
By the way, Fairfax have had the most extensive changes to the software.....they have had many, many versions over the last 3 years....there is no way they deny this !
Thanks to everyone who is contributing to this investigation by the way....just one more thumbs up and positive proof that Bev's BBV works by bringing everyone together who contributes as a team ! Well done everyone....lets keep it up, and expose this fraud with further evidence!
Brad |
John Dobbs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdobbs
Post Number: 4
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 6:34 am: |
|
BTW Brad,
Besides being a software engineer for 25 yrs, I have a lot of experience in software quality assurance, validation, verification, and testing.
Also formal change management and configuration management.
(Just in case someone tries to do the old soft shoe around testing and certification.)
And you are right on track here. No software should be released with an old version number.
It's not only misleading, but fraudulent. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 71
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 7:39 am: |
|
Morning John
Realy glad to have you on board
Just to give you a short recap:
The original version 1.5.4 was released to Hinds county Mississipi years ago, which had been passed under 1990 cert regs.
Then AVS began to sell into Virginia. Now the Virginia code is completeley different to the Hinds code, but to dodge further certification AVS badged it 1.5.4 so that if Virginia checked up, they would assume that it was certified as it was the same version number.
So Virginia's code has never actually been tested or certified in the first place !
Then to add insult to injury, the Virginia code was virtually re-designed and re-built in 2004, and deployed to the Virginia voting machines....Again, AVS badged it version 1.5.4 to dodge certification !
Also, the Virginia counties code has been changed and altered hundreds of times since 2004, and every release of code was again badged 1.5.4 by AVS in order to dodge certification.
The reason that AVS did all this, is that the code was never designed to be certified under anything other than 1990 regs.....and basically, needed scrapping, and starting all over again.
The code is VB by the way, and was badly developed by a company called Enfocom.
The code was just one big blob of VB mess, with many things that were hard coded into the application, that would have created huge nightmares for AVS had they attempted to try and get it certified.
They have also done the same side stepping with the voting machine actual hardware !
Virginia currently has several different voting machines supplied by AVS. They all look the same from the outside, but the computer components under the hood are all very different.
None of those machines are tested or certfied for the very same reasons as the software !
It gets worse John.....AVS then tested an old version of voting machine hardware at Wyle, in order to get it passed for sales to counties in PA
They then delivered to PA a new and totally different voting machine, although again the outer case remained the same.
If you have a look at the photos in the PDF I have attached a few posts up this thread you will see what I mean !
And as stated, nobody has to have any technical abilities whatsoever to play "spot the difference" in the photos.
I believe there is overwhelming evidence to call the Virginia and PA elections into question.
All the counties in PA and Virginia were given notification of these facts well in advance of this election, and chose to ignore it in the hope it would just go away.
Shame on them !
And infact counties in Virginia already knew about the lack of certification months ago because they were informed of these facts !
They chose to accept in blind faith from Howard Van Pelt the AVS CEO, that they were "Only just a bit out of certification"
Well im sorry, but you are either certified or you are not.....you cant be a little bit pregnant in my opinion, and there is no flexibility where election legislation for certification is concerned !
The fraud element to all this is actually frightening.....The leadership team of AVS have knowingly and very intently dodged certification for a number of years for personal financial gain.
By doing so in such a blatent manner intently and knowingly, they have defrauded millions of dollars from counties and the tax paying voters by expressly decieving them and selling them products that are not fit for use, and under false pretence.
Shame on them indeed !
They make a complete mockery of Democracy.
How on earth are we expected to even begin to trust that all those thousands of un-tested un-certified AVS Winvote voting machines in Virginia and PA that have just been voted on
have counted the votes anywhere near accuratley, or who knows what ????
Brad |
John Dobbs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdobbs
Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 8:11 am: |
|
Yes, it is demoralizing and a huge dissapointment for democracy.
I think we have a lot of work to do to fix this for the next election. |
Bradley Spencer
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 76
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
Hi Bev
You asked me to remind you for an update of how you got on contacting counties using the AVS Winvote ?
Thanks
Brad |
Alan Brau
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 72
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 5:38 am: |
|
Thanks, Brad!
I voted on AVS computers in the last two elections (primary and midterm).
This information will be helpful in demonstrating the legitimacy of my complaints (about certification of voting machines in PA), to both elected officials and to the courts. |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 177
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 7:11 am: |
|
Well, at least the AVS machine I voted on had a decent UI. (Plastic cover with races and names, you pushed marked areas which in turn depressed real buttons and lights came up.) |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 106
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 8:32 am: |
|
Hi Alan
How does it feel to know that the AVS machine you voted on in both elections has not been tested or passed for use in an election ?
Quite worrying isnt it ?
Armed with all the info above, I should imagine it would be difficult for any self respecting election official or court to ignore you.
I think this is 150% a perfect example of how an election vendor has side stepped the certification process in a fraudulent manner.
Let me know if there is anything I can do to help your complaints.
Brad |
Bev Harris
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Site_admin
Post Number: 204
Registered: 10-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 10:56 am: |
|
Bradley,
I need a posse of Virginia citizens to assist with public records requests. We have been getting turned down on all our requests, because "in accordance with the Virginia Freedom of INformation Act (sec. 2.2-3700 et seq., Code of Virginia)," Virginia law guarantees access to public records in the possession of the state and local agencies only to "citizens of the Commonswealth, representatives of newspapers and magazines with circulation in the Commonwealth, and representatives of radio and television stations broadcasting in the Commonwealth."
I need all the information you and others have collected with regard to the certification and changes in the AVS system, to formulate additional records requests. Then we need Virginia residents to put their names on the requests we are developing. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 718
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 1:24 pm: |
|
Ami,
Are you sure you're talking about an AVS WinVote?
Your description sounds exactly like a Danaher 1242. |
Ami Silberman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jol
Post Number: 182
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 2:22 pm: |
|
Aha, It was an AVC Advantage, from Sequioa. After having read an article on the machine the Asbury Park Press http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061018/NEWS01/610180423/1004/rss 01which talked about its usibility for the visually impaired, and having had a very positive user interface experience myself, I really would like to give some kudos to their human factors designers for the hardware itself. I really liked both the tactile and visual feedback. Of course, I don't trust anything that happens more than 1/4" below the surface, but I would like to see this sort of interface used rather than touchscreens. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 107
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006 - 3:37 pm: |
|
Bev
What additional information do you need other than detailed in my posts above ?
The Winvote software has had the same software version since 2003, despite being re built in 2004, and despite Virginia counties having recieved hundreds of changes and updates to the software over the last few years.
I think the information request needs to ask for information about all the changes that have been deployed to these machines since 2003, and why no election officials have questioned AVS as to why they havent submitted any of the vast changes to be tested or certified, and why the version number to the software hasnt changed despite all the new releases of software they have recieved.
Virginia counties have been well aware of the problem, but have chosen to sit on it and cover it up.
Anyway, let me know exactly how I can help.
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 108
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006 - 3:44 pm: |
|
Ami
Well spotted...I didnt think you were talking about the Winvote.
The Winvote UI is awfull....just look at the problems PA experienced with confusing ballots and unclear directional wording produced by AVS.
All counties in PA that used Winvote this Nov reported mass confusion from voters struggling to understand AVS's standard directional wording.
Just another example of how jurisdictions just allow the election vendor too much control and lattitude.....the counties need to start not allowing the election vendors to be so dominating in the process, and need to start to take back control of their own election !
Thanks for your comments anyway Ami
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 109
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006 - 3:58 pm: |
|
Bev
I sent all the info on AVS,s wrong doing in PA to Lowell Finley at voter action as you directed me to do.
I sent him the info about 6th November, and havent even had the courtesy of an acknowledgement or response from him !
A bit strange considering I can show without any doubt that PA and its tax paying voters have been defrauded by AVS, and that the voting units they were delivered, are not the voting units they had tested and committed to purchase.
I also sent the info to the counties in PA directly. (Numerous individuals within each department of each county)
Worrying that voters in counties in PA have voted on completely un tested voting machines for their last two elections and nobody seems to care !
Have you had any luck ?
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 110
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006 - 4:03 pm: |
|
Can anyone in PA manage to find out what the software version number is for the Advanced Voting Solutions Winvote voting machine used in the Nov 7th election ?
Thanks in advance
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 111
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006 - 4:14 pm: |
|
Sean, Lesa, Bill, John
Are you able to help Bev by assisting with gathering names of voters living in Virginia to put forward information requests on behalf of the BBV initiative in Virginia ?
Any patriotic assistance would be greatly appreciated in the defense of democracy.
Thanks guys
Brad |
Alan Brau
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 74
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 24, 2006 - 3:29 am: |
|
Brad,
I will look into the software version number for AVS machines used in the 2006 PA elections. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 114
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 24, 2006 - 6:06 am: |
|
Alan
Thanks. Much appreciated
Brad |
Alan Brau
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 85
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, February 11, 2007 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Brad,
I apologize for the delay, but my inquiries fell on deaf (and blocked) ears. As it turns out, WINvote version 2.0.3 was used in the November election, but it was version 2.0.2 which was certified in February of 2006.
I am unaware of a more recent certification of AVS software since 2/06.
I am happy to report that the County Commissioner has appointed a panel of citizens to look into these problems. More to come. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 131
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, February 12, 2007 - 7:41 am: |
|
Alan
You may like to keep an eye out for the postings on the following site with regards to the citizens advisory board in Northampton County:
http://lehighvalleyramblings.blogspot.com/2007/02/blackbox-voting-backs-up-charg e-that.html
Version 2.0.2 was tested at ITA 2/06.
The hardware tested at this time was 100% different to what was delivered by Advanced Voting Solutions.
Have a look on BBV at the thread entitled:
"PA candidate won or lost ?"
There are many documents and photographs in this thread that I have posted to clearly show what is going on.
If I can be of any further assistance, or if you need any further information, just ask Alan.
Regards
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 140
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 23, 2007 - 3:00 am: |
|
Bev
Looks like things are hotting up in PA, and positive forward movement is being made with requests from the citizens advisory board to the state to examine the WINvote units purchased from AVS by the 3 PA counties.
I believe the state and AVS have been given 10 days to respond accordingly.
I haven't seen any posts recently with regards to the requests for information from counties in Virginia who purchased WINvote.
Hows it going ?
If you can post all the responses somewhere, that have been received to date, I would like to go through them as I have first hand knowledge of what to look for at a glance with regards to specific dates, updates to software and hardware etc etc.
Brad |
Jim March
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jimmarch
Post Number: 153
Registered: 05-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 11, 2007 - 5:51 pm: |
|
There's now a big followup to this thread here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/47342.html
Short form: this is probably as much data as we're going to get until reforms hit opening these documents as public records. |
Sean & Lesa Plunkett
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Sean__lesa_plunkett
Post Number: 7
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 25, 2007 - 5:46 am: |
|
Brad, Bev, Bill, John, and Jim,
I apologize for posting this so late but I just ran across the paper on which I jotted the voting machine software version number onto Tuesday November 7th, 2006 from my Roanoke County voting precinct located at Glenvar Middle School.
I asked for permission to take a picture of the screen before I touched it. They talked amongst each other then said they had never been asked that before so a lady called someone in charge and that person said no cameras were allowed behind the voting machines partitions at all.
So I just copied all the info down and the screen read as follows:
Version 1.5.4
WV002340
Public Counter 235
Protective Counter 1174
--Lesa Plunkett |
Alan Brau
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 124
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 6:15 am: |
|
Thanks, Lesa.
I believe that that is the original version of WINvote when it was approved by PA and presumably VA. It would apply correctly in VA, only if there were NO software upgrades since its inception.
In PA, we are on WINvote version 2.0.3. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 1095
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 7:19 am: |
|
Alan,
Since VA is using 1.54, and PA certified 2.02, and uses 2.03, I'd be willing to bet that that the difference between 1.54 and 2.02 is based on the legal peculiarities of the PA Election Code.
There are two or three key issues that PA requires that are not 1) obvious, and 2) required by other states. The most "well known" is the so-called "Pennsylvania method" of casting an exception to what would otherwise be a "straight party" vote. By PA law, it must be a "one-touch" operation that does NOT require a voter to deselect the candidate whom the voter does NOT want to vote for first. I believe ONLY Pennsylvania requires this. That's worth a 2.0 right there. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 159
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, August 20, 2007 - 6:04 am: |
|
Guys
Looks like its all coming out in the wash with the iBeta comments.
Documentation submitted by AVS dont match the voting machines put forward for testing.
Sounds familiar dont ya think !
I think this might be the end for AVS......good riddance to bad rubish if you ask me !
Brad |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 162
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 3:03 am: |
|
Does anyone have any news about the AVS Winvote situation in PA ? |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 1385
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 10:28 am: |
|
Brad,
[The below is educated opinion, not legal fact. It is based on piecing together several snippets of things I've read, plus my basic experience with how key players here, such as the Secretary, think and write.]
As far a I can tell, now that federal certification is coming through the EAC RATHER than NASED, the practical effect of the language in PA's HAVA implenting law, Act 150 of 2002, has changed a bit.
Whereas under NASED, federal certification was not, strictly speaking, a prerequisite for PA certification, now that federal certification is under EAC's auspices, this seems to have changed. Everyone in Harrisburg is now seemingly singing from the same sheet of music.
Apparently, the newest version of AVS WinVote has been "provisionally examined" at the state level and it has "passed", but now that federal certification is ALSO required, the PA certification cannot be formally granted.
As far as we know, AVS, the new federal ITA, and the EAC, are still in a *issing contest (and it ain't no "k"), and federal approval of WinVote is now deemed "unlikely" in time for the November 2007 election. Supposedly, by the time the 2008 Primaries come around (PA's are still set for April, as of the moment), the WinVote should have its federal approval, and the state approval will automatically kick in if and when that happens. Any questions? Pretty nutty, huh?
Basically, since HAVA's mandates do not technically apply to the 2007 election (no federal offices in PA, even for filling a vacancy), any otherwise good PA system from the pre-HAVA days can be used for 2007 (HCPB, lever machines, central count opscan). 2008 is another matter altogether. Right now, none of those 2007 options would be acceptable for 2008 under present PA law, as interpreted by our Supreme Court. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 163
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 4:58 am: |
|
Wow....what a mess !
It will be interesting to watch and see what happens with their certification especially in light of the comments from iBeta, proving yet again that AVS are hell bent on continuing to try and circumnavigate and buck the system.
Also, it remains to be seen if AVS can actually afford to go through the full process. History, and their present financial situation would suggest not.
What I fail to understand is why PA dont just kick AVS into touch (after all, they know what AVS have been up to, regardless to what the spin doctors have to say) and go buy a suitable voting system that is certified ?
AVS have survived these past few years by "blurring the shades of grey" wherever possible.
Van Pelt is a slippery sucker at the best of times.
Thanks for the update
Brad |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 1388
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 10:06 am: |
|
Brad,
I am unfamiliar with the phrase "kick AVS into touch". What does that mean?
Couple of points. PA didn't "buy" a single WinVote. Three counties did. PA just tests the systems submitted to them, and NOT for general "goodness", but only as to whether they do what the PA Election Code requires them to do. I think there are 17 criteria, if memory serves. If the system does those 17, it passes, period.
No judgment on finances, personnel, or anything else is part of the state examination. If a vendor submits a system, and it does what the Election Code requires, it passes, even if it's made by a 13-year-old in his basement from 30-year-old Heathkit parts.
The feds have more tests to do, and the counties decide on the viability of vendors. The state has no role there. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 164
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - 4:55 am: |
|
"kick AVS into touch", I was referring to AVS being given "the boot" from their existing accounts in PA.
I was "generalizing" about PA, in the sense of the accounts within PA who use WINvote.
Given the findings of iBeta with regards to the vast amount of anomalies in AVS's certification documentation, and the simple fact that the Technical Documentation Pack they submitted did NOT match the voting machines they sent for testing, combined with AVS's inability to pay for the certification process, it will be interesting to see what happens with the certification efforts don't you think ?.
Brad |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 1410
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - 8:08 am: |
|
Brad,
That is up to each of the three counties. Subplot: you MAY find more willingness to boot AVS just AFTER this cycle. The people who ultimately made these AVS decisions are facing re-election RIGHT NOW. Admit a huge error like that now, and you give an opponent an issue. Better for now to blame AVS than your own flawed decision-making.
I agree. AVS is hanging by a very thin thread, and the snippers are poised. But be careful what you ask for. You MAY get Diebold. |
Alan Brau
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 160
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - 6:21 pm: |
|
AVS cannot be used in the November 2007 election in PA because of AVS's inability to get its cross-filing software certified. In NorCo, we will use the old lever machines this fall. It's not clear what will happen in 2008. I don't know what the other two PA counties who use AVS will do in November. At least one of the counties has scrapped its old lever machines.
I agree that AVS's problems are too big for even our vendor-friendly SOS and elections chairman to ignore. We'll have to wait and see what happens. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 165
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - 6:25 am: |
|
Yeah, I guess so.....I cant see those particular people wanting any adverse publicity or the spotlight shining on them.
Its a real pity that they didn't take some affirmative action earlier, when they clearly found out that the Winvote units they took delivery of were not voting units that had gone through any certification.
At that point they could have used the TRUTH, (Now theres a novel concept), which is that AVS substituted the voting machines they were to deliver, with a cheap replica built in China, that had never seen any testing, loaded with un-certified voting software....but Oh no, despite warnings, they chose to run "elections" on the equipment, and hope that the problem would just go away !
It is my hope that the voting tax payers of these counties take such matters into account when deciding who to elect or re-elect.
Many patriots including BBV have dedicated real time and effort in an attempt to bring awareness of the situation into the public forum...lets hope for a positive outcome.
I seem to remember a little while back a request was made to the SOS to have the Winvote re examined to prove that the voting machine was in fact NOT the same as what AVS were at the time claiming to be certified.
Does anyone know if this ever took place, or did it just gather more push back ?
Brad |
Alan Brau
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 162
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 6:56 am: |
|
Brad,
Officially, the SOS of PA never granted our legal request for re-examination of the AVS machines, but in a sense, we plaintiffs have proved our point and the SOS has conceded that the machines are not fit to be used at this time. It will be interesting to see if SOS PA re-certifies these machines for 2008 (if there is no need to cross-file and therefore no need for the special software) despite the discovery of over 2000 software and hardware "anomalies" found during iBeta's inspection.
It would be a scandalously arrogant move, but nothing would surprise me at this point. |
Bradley Spencer
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brad_spencer
Post Number: 166
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:36 am: |
|
Alan
It looks like iBeta did the job for you anyway, since they clearly picked up on what AVS were attempting to do by submitting documentation from a voting unit, along with voting machines that didn't match the documentation.
AVS have done this many times before, but the testing labs involved previously didn,t ever make it public knowledge.....I guess they were happy to get their invoices paid by AVS ?
AVS's inability to pay iBeta a single dime, clearly upset iBeta somewhat, and was more than likely the straw that broke the camels back for AVS, and open up the can of worms.
The only reason that I can think of why the SOS turned down the request, is that they already knew that AVS had defrauded them, and were in talks with AVS to put the mess right before the situation got out of control.
The refusal by the SOS was probably a stall tactic to gain a bit of time to see if it could be resolved in any way.
I agree, it would be a bad day if AVS manages to get the machines re-certified, as they will live to fight another day and continue to ride rough shod over the system....They need to be brought to justice for their actions.
Anyway, given iBeta's very public comments about the AVS Winvote (which only serves to confirm the content of this thread) , I very much doubt that it will get certified any time soon, if ever.
Brad |
David Carrithers
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Onecuriousvoter
Post Number: 1
Registered: 11-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 6, 2008 - 8:32 am: |
|
Hi Brad and everyone else that was active on this thread. My first experience with electronic voting happened to be in a polling station in Fairfax County, VA. I had the "privilege" of using the apparently infamous WINvote 1.5.4 machine. I happened to video my experience while first learning how to use the machine, and then performing a series of tests. I began to see some strange things. So, long story short, I am not surprised by the lengthy thread above. After posting the video on youtube, a writer with computerworld.com featured my experience in an article entitled: "Secret e-voting booth video: 'I'm seeing some strange things'."
http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9119080
I wonder why Virginia is still using these machines????
As a taxpayer, I expect more from my state government. |
Alan Brau
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Alan_brau
Post Number: 200
Registered: 1-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, November 6, 2008 - 5:11 pm: |
|
David,
Brad Spencer has done a lot of work on this issue (and used to work as an elections official in Fairfax Co). Perhaps you and he could organize a group of voters to petition the Secretary of State to decertify the AVS WINvote.
The AVS machines were decertified in Pennsylvania last year. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 2818
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, November 7, 2008 - 7:06 am: |
|
David, Alan,
In all fairness, the AVS WinVote was decertified in PA last year because they could not perform a Pennsylvania-specific task correctly, that being cross-filing (having one candidate for an office on multiple party lines while locking out voting multiple times for the same candidate in a "Vote for not More Than X" race).
AVS could not do that correctly for PA. My understanding is Virginia does not have that feature in its election laws.
The LATER problem when AVS went to submit a revision to the EAC-authorized federal ITA was that they "stiffed" the ITA for payment, and the recertification exam was suspended. That caused Pennsylvania to "yank AVS's ticket" permanently.
The fact is that had the cross-filing error not shown up in 2007, the AVS would still be being used in PA today, for better or worse. In even numbered-years, where everything is "Vote for 1", the problem didn't/doesn't exist.
==========================================
http://kurtspeak.blogspot.com
(some relevant to subjects here, most not)
|
|
|
