Nat Sec Lab Hacks Diebold Touch-Screen Voting Machine by Remote Control With $26 in Computer Parts

[BradBlog]

Source: BRAD BLOG, Salon



National Security Lab Hacks Diebold Touch-Screen Voting Machine by Remote Control With $26 in Computer Parts My New EXCLUSIVE at Salon
Hack team leader: 'Can do similar things on pretty much every e-voting machine'...

The Vulnerability Assessment Team (VAT) at the U.S. Dept. of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois has managed to hack a Diebold Accuvote touch-screen voting machine in what I describe at my exclusive today at Salon as perhaps "one of the most disturbing e-voting machine hacks to date."

As noted by the computer scientists and security experts at Argonne's VAT, largely all that's needed to accomplish this hack is about $26 and an 8th grade science education.

"This is a national security issue," VAT team leader Roger Johnston told me, echoing what I've been reporting other computer scientists and security experts telling me for years. "It should really be handled by the Department of Homeland Security."

Johnston should know. While the VAT folks have been dabbling in the security (or lack thereof) of e-voting systems in their spare time of late, most of the work they do is related to issues like nuclear safeguards and non-proliferation.

What makes this hack so troubling --- and different from those which have come before it --- is that it doesn't require any actual changes to, or even knowledge of, the voting system software or its memory card programming. It's not a cyberattack. It's a "Man-in-the-middle" attack where a tiny, $10.50 piece of electronics is inserted into the system between the voter and the main circuit board of the voting system allowing for complete control over the touch-screen system and the entire voting process along with it.

Add an optional $15 radio frequency remote control device, and votes can be changed, without the knowledge of the voter, from up to half a mile away…

MORE AT THE BRAD BLOG: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8785
FULL EXCLUSIVE AT SALON: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/elections/2011/09/27/votinghack/index.html

Read more: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8785

[alstephenson]

1. K & R

Wow. Thanks Brad.

[RedCloud]

181. Suppose we hack a vote somewhere?

I mean just to illustrate it, say put in Fritz the cat as dog catcher or something. 10,000 votes with only 200 cast! Something outstanding like that to wake up the sleepy heads.

[Aaria]

231. How about one state outlaws all electronic voting and counting machines so we see what the people ..

are really thinking.

[truedelphi]

2. Wow! What really scary stuff.

K & R and thanks for posting.

[vets74]

160. How about attacks on the vote tallying machines ? That was the Florida and California problem.

This attack requires physical access to the e-voting machine. That is bad news for Far Right areas where the like of a Katherine Harris is breaking laws left and right to elect her Bush.

Still, using network access is far more deadly.

In Ohio in 2004 the Republicans were doing voter fraud in 20 counties. They sabotaged voting machines. They had anti-abortion activists from Iowa and Kentucky inside county voting centers. They got access to machines prior to Election Day. Nothing was done to do V&V (verify and validate) checks on the county-level tallying machines.

Physical attacks on the individual e-voting machines ??? Sure, but that is retail election fraud.

Getting into the tallying machines is where they can move votes by the thousands. And there is no evidence if the machines are not impounded immediately at the end of voting and never turned off.

Elections are war. Get used to it.

[RC]

179. That's Election Fraud, not voter fraud..

"In Ohio in 2004 the Republicans were doing voter fraud..."

[avaistheone1]

3. Hey Brad!

Voting Technology Seminar to examine election integrity
September 27, 2011

Produced by the CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project (VTP), this one-day seminar on Saturday, Oct. 1, will bring together leading figures to examine the past, present and future of election integrity.

All stakeholders in the electoral process are welcome and encouraged to attend this free event, which takes place from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., in the Stata Center. To register, visit Voting Technology Project.

Panelists will look at issues that first aroused concern about use of computers in public elections, then assess the current situation, and future directions for enhancing election integrity. The goal is to increase dialogue among election administrators, citizens, technical professionals, academics and vendors.

The VTP was established by former MIT President Charles Vest and Caltech President David Baltimore to help prevent a recurrence of the problems that jeopardized the 2000 U.S. presidential election. The group studies all aspects of the election process, in both the United States and abroad.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/of-note.html?id=393


I don't know if you can get there - it's awfully short notice, but maybe you have contacts that can attend this seminar. Sounds interesting.



k&r

[BradBlog]

4. Thanks...

Someone else had mentioned that to me today. I can't get there, but I hope someone else covers it, because MIT/CalTech has been *terrible* over the years on this issue. Pretty much just pushing for e-voting because, well, they're computer people, when no computer is necessary (or even helpful) to run a real, transparent election!

[rgbecker]

5. Time for the Democrats to get up to speed on this technology.

Crazy to let the Republicans be the ones to swing the votes without at least a challenge from the left!

(Not Really).

[BradBlog]

6. Glad...

...that you added the "(not really)" part.

If it's time for anything, it's time to toss out the secret vote counting and count publicly and transparently in front of all at the precincts, with results posted there before ballots ever move anywhere on election night.

Election counting "problem" solved.

[midnight]

31. Wisconsin has a Waukesha county clerk that could use some help

with her counting problem.... I hope the first place to create publicly transparent counting starts here...

[PatrynXX]

38. cept she doesn't even have a 5th grade education

let alone an 8th grade education (do'h) using outdated software.. zzzzzzzz paper trails should be required like the insurance mandate even more so because the insurance mandate is a Republican plan

[midnight]

120. I was looking for this women's education info. and found this.

http://www.followthemoney.org/database/search.phtml?searchbox=Nickolaus


At this link there is info. that I don't necessarily understand, but it used the word uncoded next to her name... and there is a lot of people with the last name Nicolas...

[Yon_Yonson]

84. NEOCON Clerk Kathy is a real hindrance to American Democracy

I am still waiting for the Fed Justice Department to show up with the handcuffs and haul her arse off to the slammer.

[lutefisk]

118. The state investigation just ended, finding she "violated state law, but not on purpose"

LOL on us, eh"

Read about it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=186x35527

[midnight]

124. I think the crime was not investigated only the human error...

There is no mention of the computer being taken for a forensic investigation...

[lutefisk]

128. The report specifically does

Is there another investigation going on? Wasn't it the G.A.B. that took the computer(s)? What I get out of the report is that what happened does not rise to the level of a crime, so as Gene Hunt would say: "end of".

"Attorney Verhoff concluded that Clerk Nickolaus’ failure to post election night results from the City of Brookfield “appears to be either an honest mistake or ineffectiveness,” and that “her conduct does not appear to rise to the level of conduct that can be described as willful neglect or a refusal to comply with the law.” As a result, he did not recommend referral for criminal prosecution."

http://gab.wi.gov/node/2034

[midnight]

203. The real crime is and will always be the flipping of the voters intent..

Kathy Nicholas intent is an entirely different matter.... But they, the computer hackers, are very confident to know this is not provable... So just a lot of bells and whistles going off...

[Yon_Yonson]

200. NEOCON Clerk Kathy is a HUMAN ERROR

"People are so busy dreaming the American Dream, fantasizing about what they could be or have a right to be, that they're all asleep at the switch. Consequently we are living in the Age of Human Error."

... apparently she is not responsible!

I just saw news video of three high school students hauled out in handcuffs for cheating on their SATS, make me firmly believe that 'the hindrance to American justice is the legal systems"! My take is that the SATS are more important that our voting system!

[midnight]

204. Touche!

[Aaria]

232. Always was told Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Unless your a politco.

[donquijoterocket]

127. And Mississippi

Has a county clerk who thinks these machines are infallible and invulnerable to any hack.
http://tinyurl.com/3lzhg2g
But of course this is "scientific" evidence certain to stiffen the resistance of any wingnut who hears it.

[dmkinsey]

78. No, really

Now is the time to totally eviscerate the e-voting systems. Change the results so completely and obviously that no one can doubt what was done.
We can shout from the roof tops until we're blue but no one will listen. Only an undeniable demonstration in a real election will work.

[quakerboy]

196. The sad thing is even if we hacked the machines

the counting on the other end would probably just "fix" it for the repubs anyway.

[defendandprotect]

11. "Technology" ... ? A 12 year old could figure this out -- !! Actually....

Thom Hartmann has reported that he spoke with an elected Democrat who said that

the subject is TABOO in the Demcoratic Party -- not to be discussed!

Evidently, the report is that Democratic Party officials feel that ...

"if the Democratic voters got the idea that our elections weren't honest that

they would not come out to vote."


Anyone find any logic or common sense in that -- or think it's believable?

[elleng]

109. No logic; believable? Sure. Chicken**** Dem 'establishment'

has to have its a**** kicked by US, NOW.

This is INTOLERABLE!

I'll send this info to my 'critters,' and 'demand' action. Generally pretty good ones, here in MD, but they can't continue to 'enable' repugs theft (along w changes they're making to States' voting rules.)

[defendandprotect]

132. We need to ask WHY we should come out to vote on hackable computers -- !!!

[elleng]

155. Don't think so. Even asking such question

gives rise to some who would otherwise vote Dem use as excuse to not vote. If that happens, forget our democracy.

We need to do everything we can to assure fair rules AND accurate tabulations, even if it means kicking some 'prof' Dem a****. I'm afraid that's what we have to do.

[defendandprotect]

206. That's hilarious -- though it has been the excuse of higher ups in the Dem Party, it seems. ... !!

But that has evidently been the excuse for treating the computers as a TABOO subject!!

:rofl: --- :rofl: --

Couple of possibilities here --

Elected Dems are really dumb --

and/or they FEAR accusing the Repugs and fighting them --

In either case, I'd suggest they are doing neither the party nor citizens any good

and we should vote them out!

[vets74]

161. Match THEIR CRIMES with OUR OWN STUPIDITY !!

On the 1/1,000 chance that a voting machine is screwed. O.K., fine.

[defendandprotect]

207. You think it's one in a thousand votes that are hacked? hmmm.....

[Aaria]

233. Of course they won't talk about it, how do you think they got their jobs.

[No Elephants]

35. Have you ever wondered why Democrats never enacted tougher laws about that between

January 2007 and January 2011.


Please no one remind me about 60 Senators.

At the very least, Senators who oppose clean elections should have to go on record as opposing laws to clean them up.

Ditto for any President of either Party who want to veto.

[Stevepol]

44. Good luck getting the Dems to pay attention.

The whole forum here on DU has been dedicated to getting this done for several years now, for me at least since 2002, for others even longer. The evidence is overwhelming that it is "trivially easy" (Steve Freeman's term) to hack or misprogram or change results on a voting machine without anyway to check afterwards. The only way to verify is to have paper and actually do audits for each election. It could hardly be more obvious. When the vote is done in secrecy without verification, it's impossible to have a democracy.

As far as I can tell, nobody among the powers that be really gives a shit.

[No Elephants]

56. A Congressional committee investigated and found out rigging would be very easy.

AFAIK, Congress did nothing, even though voting is how they themselves get into office -- or not.


Their inaction under those circumstances speaks louder than words, IMO.


I think it's more than simply not caring.

[Botany]

65. A really good democrat Ohio's former Sec. of State ...

.... Jennifer Brunner had the gold standard of testing of electronic voting machine, The Everest Project,
that showed flaws in ALL OF the voting machine's security and she was dumped on by the good old
boy state and national democratic party network. They supported her establishment opponent, Lee Fisher,
in the democratic primary in 2010 for Ohio's U.S. senate seat. BTW Lee Fisher got his ass kicked by Rob
Portman who helped to outsource thousands of jobs as part of W's administration.

[OnyxCollie]

96. I got into an argument with my poli-sci professor

about Jennifer Brunner.

I told him that I believed she was dumped by the DSCC in favor of Fisher because of her support for fair and accurate elections.

That really pissed him off.

I chose to vote for Dan LaBotz, the Socialist candidate.

[Botany]

121. It wasn't just just her support for fair elections* but it ...

... was the good old boys club telling her that it just wasn't her turn and that Ted Strickland had
promised Lee Fisher his support in 2010 for the U.S. Senate ...... Fisher had been a cancer to Ohio
Dems since the 1990s when he spent millions in trying to prosecute a fellow democrat for a crime
he never committed because Lee saw that person as a threat to his run for Governor.

[OnyxCollie]

166. Thanks for the info. nt

[defendandprotect]

133. We can only conclude that Dem Party is content with the way things are re computer voting -- ???!!!!

[defendandprotect]

209. And the next question is WHY .... ?????

And keep in mind that the computers have been with since the 1960's ....

the LARGE computers used by MSM -- in 2000 they were used to REVERSE the call of

Florida for Gore -- came in during the mid-1960's --

the electronic voting machines began coming in during the late 1960's --

And I'd question every election back to Nixon/Humphrey --


In fact, in the late 1960's in Florida, two journalists looking at the odd and unlikely

results began to look at the computers and ttrack the results --

They wrote a book based on their invetigation -- under contract --

VOTESCAM -- THE STEALING OF AMERICA --

When it hit the bookstores it was almost immediately taken off the shelves!


You can read the book at the family's website -- free --

the book is available here and there for about $3 --


http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[frylock]

99. they've had five years to get up to speed..

remember when conyers was forced to hold meetings in a broom closet? once the dems took control of congress, they seemed to stop giving a shit about this.

[DeeDeeNY]

7. K & R

[benld74]

8. We told you, we told you, we told you, we told you, NOW DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT DAMMIT!!!!

OUTLAW tha dam things NOW

[truedelphi]

146. I don't think that either party cares. Look at history!

The Democrats have areas of the country where they have their control; the Republicans have their areas.

It was Ralph Nader and Cobb, both third party candidates, that put forth the most effort and the most money, to assist voting activists in Ohio after the 2004 election fraud in that state.

[plumbob]

9. NOW can we have paper ballots?

Anyone? Bueller?

[No Elephants]

57. Sorry, no. Please see Replies 11, 44 and 56.

And stop asking so many questions.

And pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[defendandprotect]

10. KR -- and Democratic Party doesn't know this .... ? Obama doesn't know ... ? DOJ ... ?

This has been obvious since 2000 --

but keep in mind that the LARGE computers used by MSM came in during the mid-1960's --

and the electronic voting computers came in during the late-1960's --

2000 got very NOISY and of course attracted a lot of attention -- but this has been

going on much longer ---


In fact, two Florida journalists began to investigate computer voting due to the very

odd and quesitonable results they were seeing in Florida elections during the late 1960's --

After their investigation, they wrote a book under contract which can be read here --


VOTESCAM -- THE STEALING OF AMERICA --

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[HowHasItComeToThis]

131. NOTHING HERE, MOVE ALONG

[valerief]

12. But Republicans tell us this is impossible. Think they're lying? Or stupid? Or both? nt

[bongbong]

15. 'pigs

The repigs are lying if their lips are moving; a small minority of them aren't stupid (the ones giving the orders to all the rest); and they all hate America with a flaming passion.

[hootinholler]

17. Neither

The Republican owned Diebold is insecure by design. This nugget is gravy.

[Stevepol]

83. ES&S is the worst of the lot I think.

Of course, the Urosevic bros (more dangerous to democracy than the Koch bros IMO) counted about 70% of the vote one year recently as heads of Diebold and ES&S. Would have been nice to bug their telephone calls or emails to each other before the elections (or maybe their secret meetings). A person could have done a better job predicting the results of the election I think by consulting with them ahead of time rather than going thru the bother and expense of the election.

[No Elephants]

59. And we act as though we believe every word because we do not even try to do

anything about it. Are we lying? Or stupid? Or both?

Please see also, Replies 11, 44 and 56.

We really need to re-examine our paradigms.

Among other things, they don't seem to be working for those of us who are not multi-millionaires.

[frylock]

100. who cares what republicans think? dems have been siitting on their nuts since they took control..

why aren't THEY doing anything about this?

[VWolf]

104. Read the article - It says that an 8th grade science education

is required. That excludes most all Republicans.

:sarcasm:

[valerief]

192. Ha! Exactly! nt

[No Elephants]

222. We know election fraud exists. If Republicans are too dumb to do it.......

[ejbr]

13. I am

SHOCKED! :wow:

:sarcasm:

[Mnemosyne]

14. I am stunned.

NOT

[zeemike]

16. And this of course will be totally ignored by both parties.

As it has been in the past....no need to go fucking up a game when it plays out just like you want it to every time.

[marions ghost]

173. right...

fair and transparent voting might just turn this country into...a Democracy. :wow:

All other protest is moot unless you call for Election Reform as well.

[christx30]

18. It sounds alarming..

but who is going to be able to get $26 together at the same time to buy the computer parts these days? Not like I can really spare anything right now.

[rhett o rick]

184. THe Koch Bros are probably passing them out to their followers. nm

[Wilms]

19. Any response from the EAC?

Just pullin' your leg! :hi:

Well done, Brad.

[BradBlog]

24. Ha!

They are rushing to ignore it even as we speak!

[Bennyboy]

20. We are done, FINIS, DUNZO, its over, call in the clowns....

And no one caresa bout this? WHY ISN'T THIS ON THE NEWS TONIGHT?

[No Elephants]

60. You sure you want MORE clowns?

I thought pushing 600 and their respective staffs on the federal level alone were enough, but maybe that's just me.

[left on green only]

21. If you think that is bad......

then you might also be interested to read that one time when I was voting during the 70's, the method being used was the manual punching of ballot cards done by the voter inside a private voting booth. When a person was finished voting, they took their punched ballot card and were then obliged to hand it over to a Registrar of Voters "volunteer", who was then supposed to drop the punched ballot card into the slot in the top of a big white box.

At that time I was living in a right wing neo-fascist community, and all of the "volunteers" at my poling place looked to me to be right wing nazis to the core. When I gave my punched ballot card to the volunteer standing in front of the big white box, he looked to see what I had punched out in a specific area of the card, and then he placed my ballot in a special stack that was lying along side of the box. When I protested, I was told to "move along". Later, after I arrived home, I called the office of the Registrar of Voters and reported what had happened. I was told that my eyes must have deceived me, because such a thing was not possible. I was told that the "volunteer" could not possibly have known what I had voted for by looking at the position of the punched holes on my ballot. Although at the time I was not naive enough to believe that, I was still very young and somewhat unfamiliar with the way things worked in the "adult" world.

I would assert that right wing voter fraud is not anything new. It has been going on for years. Needless to say, all of my voting choices on that day were for liberal candidates, as well as liberal positions on all of the ballot measures. While that form of fraud specifically has never happened to me again, what I have experienced on more than one occasion since, is having the "volunteer" hold the completed ballots in their hand until a number of them have accumulated, before then depositing them into the slot, en mass. On those occasions, I now stand at the table and wait until I see the "volunteer" drop my ballot into the box. Unfortunately, I am still voting in right wing neighborhoods with volunteers who largely appear before my eyes as being from the fascist right.

[aquart]

37. Voter fraud would be something YOU did. This is ELECTION fraud.

[left on green only]

147. Thank you for the correction

[Ellipsis]

22. Just another actor earning a living in a mundane job... not !!! WELL DONE BRAD!

Perseverance is the key to success.

[BradBlog]

25. Thanks...But on that "earning a living" part.... :-(

[Nictuku]

23. Since 2004 I've been wondering...

... why nothing is ever done about this. Not by the Democrats, nor the Republicans. Something really stinks about this. Maybe the only way to get them to fix the problem with hackable electronic voting machines is to demonstrate just how easy it is to hack it. For real.

[BradBlog]

27. Call for Anonymous, line 1...Anonymous, please pick up line 1...

[No Elephants]

64. They ALL know how easy it is to hack it.

Please see Replies 11, 44 and 56.

NO ONE in Washington wants to do anything thing about it.

The only real question is why.

Edited to put in a missing word.

[valerief]

170. Democracy is all smoke and mirrors, just an illusion. It's not real. nt

[blkmusclmachine]

26. Worse than anyone expected.

n/t

[No Elephants]

68. Oh, I wouldn't be too sure of that.

[Lugnut]

28. So when will somebody fix this?

If the voting machines can be corrupted the whole system is corrupt. This is not a new revelation. Get rid of the damned machines.

[gtar100]

29. Time for hackers to swing things in a Democratic direction!!

Two can play at this game. These machines will not be removed until the Repug party realizes that they are no longer safe. The only thing that is keeping them safe is the honesty and fairness at the heart of any real Democrat. We are repulsed and sickened by these machines yet they continue to be used more and more as if nothing is wrong. And republicans are silently at ease with them. That should tell you everything.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

32. That won't be enough to change anything

As noted above, the Dems are complicit in all of this by their silence.

If you want to see some actual change, someone has to hack these things to give wins to Greens, Socialists, Libertarians and other third parties. If that ever happened, the calls from leaders on both sides to abolish or secure e-voting would come so fast your head would spin.

[Nay]

50. Amen, Tyrone. This is an outrage that we've all been screaming about

for 10 years at least, and what has been done? More electronic voting machines have been installed! The ONLY way to be rid of them is for the machines to all of a sudden start to give wins to Dems in districts that aren't dem -- as you said, the machines would be in the local dump the next day.

Sad, isn't it? Nothing, NOTHING, is not corrupt in this country, I swear to god.

[City Lights]

55. Bingo!

:thumbsup:

[No Elephants]

66. My nominee for thread winner, with one teeny amendment:

Silence is not necessarily the only way to be complicit.

[truedelphi]

148. Anonymous - where are you!

My dream of heaven would be a world where the Greens steal the 2012 Pres. race, and where every single penny belonging to the Koch Bros has gone "missing."

(I am a FDR Democrat, and the only way we will see any of FDR's policies in effect is to have a third party person in the Highest Office. Obama ran as a FDR-style progressive, and then quickly forgot all of his FDR-style pledges once in office.)

[gtar100]

158. You're right! I'd love to see that! How about some Communists too...

That would light a fire under their feet for sure. How about *NO* wins on the repug side.

[Demeter]

42. I like the way you think, and agree that beating them at the game is the only way to fix it

and I'm tired of "noble" Democrats in charge ignoring the issue, because of dreamy "bipartisanship" and idealistic thoughts that "nobody would do such a thing."

This is the way politics are operated in the world of men. It's even worse in the world of women.

[No Elephants]

70. I don't think nobility or idealism or dreams of bipartisanship on the part of either major Party

has a thing to do with the reasons this persists.

I think the author of Reply 32 nailed it, except that I think complicity may not be limited to only silence.

(Not sure if "complicity" is a word, but I don't feel like googling, so I hope my meaning is clear.)

[No Elephants]

61. Yes, exactly, two can play at this game.

Please see Replies 11, 44 and 56 and, as you do, please bear in mind what you said about two being able to play at this game.

ETA: Scratch the above. Reply 32 nailed it (IMO).

[Kaleko]

30. Thanks, Brad. This should be passed along by everyone. n/t

[boppers]

33. Vote a) on paper b) by mail.

Pretty simple.

Especially since messing with mail lands hard, federal, time.

Polling places are a mid-20th-century discrimination against those without means to travel.

[No Elephants]

75. Easy to fake absentee ballots, too.

[Aaria]

129. Not as easy as stealing 10k votes with the flip of a switch or the whole election.

[BradBlog]

178. Actually, yes, it IS as easy...

Vote by mail is also counted secretly by computers. It's just as easy to flip a vote-by-mail op-scan tabulator, as it is to flip a DRE tabulator. Unfortunately.

For other reasons why Vote-by-Mail is a terrible idea (except in jurisdictions where it's the ONLY way to cast a paper ballot -- and even there, you can usually drop the ballots off at the county or the precinct, rather than sending by mail), see this: http://bradblog.com/?p=6003

[No Elephants]

221. Maybe, but only the outcome counts. (Very easy to discard absentee ballots, too).

[bvar22]

174. Voting by Mail is the LEAST SECURE of all the ways to vote.

1) There is NO Chain of Custody.

2)There is no possibility of even informal Exit Polls.

The ONLY way to have Open, Transparent Elections is:

*One Day Voting, National Holiday

*Paper Ballots

*Publicly Hand Counted at the Poling Station
with live InterNet Video Observation. NO moving of ballots or boxes until the vote is certified.

*Results posted on the Polling Station Door

*Independent Exit Polls

*International Monitors & Certification would be nice.


Dennis Kucinich is one of the very few Democrats willing to discuss this issue,
and offer better ways to secure our voting.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Aaria]

229. There is no secure way to vote 100% of the time.

[bvar22]

237. ...but some ways are much more secure than others.

Voting By Mail is one of the least secure methods of voting,
but it IS really convenient.

I'm not content to sit home and trust my TV to tell me who won the election.

[Aaria]

230. The US postal service is a very secure way to deliver the ballots.

[bvar22]

234. And what happens to them after they are "delivered".

There is no way to know how many ballots were "delivered", counted, compiled, or thrown in the trash.

Voting by mail is completely opaque.

[BradBlog]

177. (b) is a VERY bad idea...

...here's just a few of the reasons why: http://bradblog.com/?p=6003

[boppers]

214. Interesting critique.

Follow up post, too:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6650

[kimsarah]

34. What's good for the goose

is good for the gander.

[No Elephants]

69. Please see Reply 32.

[aquart]

36. Well, I never thought that could happen.

Much.

[INdemo]

92. It would appear and ..just guessing with all the Republican

pacs approved by the SCOTUS,with unlimited funding, does anyone believe that election theft is not in their plans?..If this election is close Obama loses..Unless some real serious safeguards are put forth and I doubt that will happen with a Repuke majority in the House.
Axelrod has already told us to brace ourselves for a loss.

[aquart]

218. Plans? It's their policy.

[dmosh42]

39. Does that mean elections are rigged? OMG!

[hamerfan]

40. Verifiable paper ballots!

R.I.P., Andy. :hug:

[Firebrand Gary]

41. K&R

[slay]

43. Brad you have been on top of the e-voting nightmare for years - excellent stuff!

as always. you and Andy Stephenson are my e-voting exposure heroes!

[Enthusiast]

45. Through some means,

the use of these voting machines must end before the 2012 election.

[No Elephants]

71. If I had a hammer, I'd hammer in the morning, I'd hammer in the evening, all over this land.

That is about the only way this will stop.

If either Party wanted to do anything about this they would have.

Something about it must be working for both Parties.

[w0nderer]

46. k&r n/t

[Enthusiast]

47. Ask yourself, is this why

Teabaggers and Republicans are acting so smug and self assured? Just look at the arrogance by Walker, Scott and Kasich, for example. They haven't allowed low approval ratings and public outrage to influence them in the least. Something is afoot.

[Hubert Flottz]

48. Democracy your ass

[liberal N proud]

49. They had to make it easy enough for the average GOPer to help

When the steal elections they will rely on the average Joe Plumber to perpetrate the actual hacking. So they had to make it simple enough for Joe Republican to do the job.

[The Wizard]

51. When fascism comes to America

it will be disguised as free and fair elections.

[defendandprotect]

135. +1 --

:hi:

[begin_within]

52. Diebold also makes ATMs for Bank of America

I wonder how easy it is to hack those.

[kentauros]

73. From what I've read, not very.

The banks make sure that the software is secure, and Diebold makes it available to them, presumably for security testing. They have been rather obstinate in their refusal to share the software for voting machines.

I'd say now is the time for the hackers to break into Diebold's voting machines and share their "proprietary" software with the world. Maybe then they'll understand why it's important to us to know how vulnerable the software is. Obviously, we now know how vulnerable the hardware is...

[truedelphi]

150. In Australia, the ATM's were installed some decade or two back -

And they distributed thousands of dollars to each person using their bank card. Above and beyond what the user had requested. (I don't know if they were Diebold machines or not.)

No one ever admitted exactly how much money went "missing" during the first 48 hours. But it was a big story Down Under for a while.

These days, things like that get covered up. The banks do not want us to know how much of thier money (read our money, from our accounts) ends up going away.

[truedelphi]

152. A big difference between Bank ATM's and voting ATM's

Is that when you bank, you get a receipt as a record, with a clear posting of how much you added in or took from your account, and a balance total.

That is one of the things that we voting activists have said over and over again - that a voter should get a damn receipt. But often, those in charge, including Democratic Party leaders, state that is not possible to do.

And usually the answer is silence.

But sometimes an official will state something like, "Well, if you get a receipt for your vote, showing whom you voted for, then what if your employer asks to see it? Without a receipt, no one can hassle you."

Voting activists reply to that nonsense with insistence that there be laws to make sure that no one can legally ask to see your receipt, except election officials in contested elections. And to have stiff fines for employers, pastors of churches, precinct captains, etc who make such demands.

[yodermon]

187. voting receipts == votes can be bought.

secret ballot means *secret*, not "user opt-in/opt-out"-secret.

[provis99]

199. receipts don't work, either.

the computer could simply record a vote for a republican, and print out a receipt saying you voted for the Democrat. An easy hack to accomplish.

[Vinca]

53. You know what would finally fix this problem?

If Democrats had the remotes. Seriously. It seems Republicans can get away with anything, but there would be an Issa-ish investigation in a heartbeat if Democrats ran ther remotes. How about we win ALL the elections?:rofl:

[justiceischeap]

67. No, I think what will finally fix this problem is when Anonymous

decides it's going to hijack an election. It's only a matter of time before they do.

[hobbit709]

54. and that's not even counting what's done at the county and state level

by the collusion of R election officials. Think Waukesha, OH, 18181, etc.

PAPER TRAIL NOW!

[Botany]

58. Brad, In my opinion this was no mistake or glitch but ....

.... that the hardware in the voting machines were designed and installed so as to allow manipulation of the vote.
Because it is doubtful that this "glitch" just happened to be in the guts of the machine by random chance. This is no
accident or oversight in production of some kind of data processor and if you do not believe me go use your debit
card and buy a pack of gum and a coke at a CVS and then go down the street and access your account @ your bank's
Diebold ATM and ask for a print out of the last 10 transactions in your account and you will get a piece of paper that
will show you spent $2.35 just 20 minutes ago 2 miles away. So Diebold can build, install, and maintain systems
that are far more complex and yet we are to believe that a simple computer that just has to add 1 + 1 + 1 .....
has a built in security systems breech that allows for remote and untraceable manipulation of the integrity of
the data by accident? Please.

Voter suppression and actual manipulation of the vote has to be part of the standard operating procedures of the
Republican / Corporate / Right Wing playbook because without it except in places like Oklahoma, they would be
swept from power.

[valerief]

81. Of course, it's no accident. Of course, it's by design. Anyone who thinks otherwise has their

eyes wide shut.

[newspeak]

115. wasn't there a man in florida who said he was approached by arepug

congresscritter about if the machines could be hacked? Didn't he die in an auto accident?

Let's face it corporations are running the show and any candidate that attempts to help the people instead of wall street, banks and global corporations, will lose. Hasn't our government apparatus been doing this for years, except with other countries? any country that attempts to help it's people over corporate profits seems to lose their democratically elected leaders or are demonized. "shock doctrine"-"confessions of an economic hit man", were warnings. It's just our turn now.

[Botany]

126. yep! That would be Clint Curtis

http://www.bradblog.com/?page_id=3980

[INdemo]

62. In 2004 and in 2006 Democrats stood up and stated that

never again will an election be in doubt..Nothing was done..And here we are with the 2012 election and the same..nothhing will be done.

[No Elephants]

72. I suppose you want one of them "one person, one vote" ponies.

Don't hold your breath.

[INdemo]

79. You completely missed my point..Election reform has been talked

about since 2000..When the Democrats took control of both Houses(2006) they promised to pass legislation that would set standards for voting machines.A paper copy of the vote cast,etc..And nothing..And now with the Repukes in charge we won't see any changes because a close election in 2012 will be to their advantage and the corporate mafia will take advantage.

[defendandprotect]

211. +1 -- ROFL --

[defendandprotect]

210. Oh, but they did do something ....

they scapegoated Nader in order to try to get a huge critic of both parties

off their backs -- !!

And these computers have been with us since the late 1960's -- !!

Amd two journalists began investigating at that time --


VOTESCAM -- THE STEALING OF AMERICA --

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[SpiralHawk]

63. Huge story

A national security risk indeed.

[theaocp]

74. Why is ANYONE surprised by this?

There is no reason to have e-voting machines and it is my firm belief this has been going on since there. have. been. e-voting. machines. Duh.

[No Elephants]

76. Who said anyone was surprised?

[No Elephants]

77. The only thing I care about anymore is if I can do anything to change this.

The rest is bull puckies.

Please don't tell me to write the White House or my Rep or Senators. If any of them could or would do anything about this, it would be done by now. EVERY one of them is more aware of the problem than we are.

Pease don't give me that GOTV beyond the margin of error meme, either. It's not that much harder to change 20,000 votes than it is to change 2. And people are not all that shy about election results that come out differently than exit polls suggest, either. And polls can be rigged, too.

BTW, has anyone seen how Romney vs. Obama is polling these days? No margin to speak of.

[hwmnbn]

80. K&R

[cppuddy]

82. If you cant beat them; join them.

If they want to play dirty and change votes; then Dems should do the same. Counter ever thing the Repub. do. If that means hacking and changing votes then that needs to be done. Dems will have to get into the mud to if they want to compete. Is it right or fair? At this point it doesn't matter; because if Dems. don't play at their they will lose. Dems are competing against a side with no morals or scruples.

[Yon_Yonson]

85. Point well taken

[OnyxCollie]

101. What makes you think they haven't?

People don't steal elections for good reasons, whether they be Republican or "Democrat."

[DFW]

86. This has been known for almost ten years

After the 2002 election, when Max Cleland was Diebolded out of the Senate, I asked my brother, who does
high tech stuff for the Defense Department, how easy it would be to manipulate the results of these
voter-counting machines. He said--and this is NINE YEARS AGO, mind you--that if you give him a laptop
and a cell phone, and he can make any electronic vote-counting machine spew out any result he wants it to.

Just remember the 2004 "election," when Bush "won" Ohio, contrary to all pre-election polls and exit polls.
EVERY HARD DRIVE BUT ONE in Ohio was collected by its manufacturer, who reported the "result," and then
erased the hard drive (private property, doncha know). One--exactly one--of these machines did get a thorough
forensic examination. In a precinct with about 600 registered voters, it gave Bush 3000 votes. The Ohio
Republicans called it a "glitch," reduced Bush's margin of victory by 2500 votes, and said done deal, no
need to examine ANY of the other machines.

These machines are ALL made by Republican-connected companies. How many elections where the Republicans
were expected to win were instead won in a surprise upset by the Democrat where these machines were used?

Zero.

How many elections where the Democrats were expected to win were won in a surprise upset by the Republican?
Dozens! Right on up to the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House.

The Republicans are the ultimate Stalinists, forget their "anti-communist" public fetishes. As Stalin stated
so accurately almost a century ago: "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide
everything."

After the midterms of 2002, Ohio 2004, on up to the most recent debacles in Wisconsin, is there
anyone out there who thinks Stalin got it wrong?

[Overseas]

91. Well said. Sad truth.

[newspeak]

117. yep, and now exit polls mean squat

Oh surprise, the exit poll showing candidate A winning--what a surprise candidate B actually won-who would a thunk?

[slackmaster]

87. Outrageous. It should have required at least $4,000 worth of equipment.

:argh:

[yesphan]

88. K & R nt

[FourScore]

89. It's wonderful to see this being reported on today by the MSM...oh wait...I guess they missed this

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!

K&R

[beac]

90. Terrifying. K&R. n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

93. This is detectable.

Has anyone ever FOUND such a modification installed in one of these machines? Someone has to get into the machine, twice, once before the election, once after to remove the device, to pull this off.

I get into screaming matches with republicans over similar shit, like Acorn workers registering 'mickey mouse' for the couple-buck bounty on voter registrations. Yes, it's voter registration fraud, but it doesn't mean 'Mickey Mouse' ever actually fucking voted. Just because someone COULD have done the attack in this article, doesn't actually mean it HAS happened.

[Ellipsis]

102. $5.90 for a set of two

[AtheistCrusader]

108. Yep, but they need access too.

So someone has to be not looking, or corrupt within the election system itself.

I certainly think the machines should have election oversight with tamper seals and whatnot, we can work on that. But overall, I'm still not convinced this has actually happened. It seems a lot more possible, for sure, but I want to know if it HAS happened.

[Ellipsis]

112. Of course... you're right.

The point of the OP shows ANOTHER vulnerability of the technology.

This implementation of technology was inspired by the amount of money distributed by HAVA, the mandate accompanied by it, and slick salesman who sold proprietary systems on a promise. When in fact it was just the HAVA dollars they wanted... and they got it plus obscenely sizable maintenance contracts.

This equipment has high failure ratios 12 to 15 percent, partly due to the fact that they are shunted around between storage and the precincts, and I'd guess, partly because they were engineered on the cheap. There is plenty of opportunity for nefarious types to have access regardless of the type of hack.

Get rid of the equipment get rid of the doubt.

[AtheistCrusader]

114. Personally, I'd like to skip on to something like Bitcoin for online voting.

Paperless is totally do-able, with a private key that we can use to verify our votes later on. Before and after the counting.

Internet access as a basic right can move us in a direction where this is more possible. Tons of libraries with computers, etc.



I agree, these machines are problematic, not just in the fraud sense, but as you mention, the exclusive maintenence contracts, etc. Vampires, no matter how you slice it.

[Ellipsis]

125. Paper for me, regardles of complicated balots. (There are ways around it)

I doubt if Wilms or Bill Bored would agree with you.

Regardless, if people agree to sit down and design a system, it can be done.


Right now there are too many politicians afraid of looking stupid because of the expenditures made by The HAVA act. "If they're not kissing babies they're stealing their lollipops."


Later.

[newspeak]

119. I thought the machines are propriety to the corporation

and only the corporate employee can get into the machine?

[newspeak]

122. yeah, well when acorn bundles suspect voter registrations

together and turns them in which is required by law and then the repugs make a shit load big deal about it because they don't want any of those poor people or those people of a different color voting is different when a corporation who has a political interest is the one facilitating the machines. Of course in Nevada a repug voter registration group tore up democratic registrations who could not re-register by a decision of a nv judge. Oh, the horror, I heard all of those repugs wanting to get rid of voter overreach--NOT. That group just moved on to another state to screw. Acorn bad, any repug voter regis. group ripping up other than repug registrations, good.

Repugs always yell voter fraud--there is little voter fraud in this country; now electoral fraud is very different.

And you can see the agenda right now, the repug governors are doing their damnedest to disenfranchise as many voters as possible before the next election.

[Ignis]

149. Physical security over electronic voting machines is often laughable.

They've been found stored in stairwells of public buildings, behind unlocked doors, you name it.

[patrice]

94. K&R

[Amonester]

95. Nothing will be done about it, unless...

occupations will become successful enough ASAP...

Should be clear to anyone thinking... (Don't count on the current "elected's" to fix that).

[duhneece]

97. In NM we fought for voter-verified, auditable ballots

I don't know which other states have them, but all 50 states need them.

[frylock]

98. please. this is soooooo 2004..

the democrats have had almost five years to deal with this. five years to meet in a chamber, rather than a fucking broom closet and make efforts to ensure electronic election fraud will never occur. that hasn't happened, so clearly this just really isn't that important an isssue to them.

[Mosaic]

139. Makes you suspicious doesn't it?

Are the two parties really just one, the duopoly a big fraud. Can we be an example of democracy to world? I don't' think so.

[certainot]

103. there will be no sig election reform until the 'left' challenges RW talk radio

imagine how fast we'd be back to paper if democracy loving americans had 1000 talk radio stations. we've heard shit like this before and thank you brad and others, but we're no closer to fixing it and won't until we get the house back and get 60+ senators (not including blue dogs whose state politics are dominated by RW radio and who are afraid of limbaugh).

-- on the contrary, a recent poll shows the main concern for republicans re voting is voter fraud and that for dems is voter suppression, and voter fraud is basically a creation of the GOP that could not be popularized without that right wing radio monopoly (you can't do that to so many people with fox, email, and blogs). meanwhile, voter suppression is sold on national and local RW radio weekly for years in the guise of protecting our borders, lies about dems stealing elections, terrorists with fake IDs, etc., and using that dominating local soapbox to sell the ALEC-style initiatives.

those coordinated RW radio stations have done the groundwork for selling e-voting and protecting it under the guise of making voting MORE secure (protecting it from dem fraud- hanging chad counters etc.) and saving money.

the whole thing can be turned around in an election if the left would get off it's ass and stop ignoring RW radio because they'd rather listen to music and blog, while it's kicking their internet ass. picket the stations, get university sports off them, and boycott and shame local sponsors until the stations can't pay overhead and limbaugh is elevated to head of the GOP.

[OnyxCollie]

111. It's certainot, the one-trick pony, dragging out his tired RW radio screed.

Blaming the "left" for sitting on it's ass when it was the Third Way/DLC "Democrats" fault for the RW radio empire.

He's a one trick pony
One trick is all that horse can do
He does one trick only
It's the principal source of his revenue
And when he steps into the spotlight
You can feel the heat of his heart
Come rising through

See how he dances
See how he loops from side to side
See how he prances
The way his hooves just seem to glide
He's just a one trick pony (that's all he is)
But he turns that trick with pride

Paul Simon, "One Trick Pony"

The Telecommunications Act of 1996
http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf

SEC. 202. BROADCAST OWNERSHIP. (a) NATIONAL RADIO STATION OWNERSHIP RULE CHANGES REQUIRED- The
Commission shall modify section 73.3555 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555) by eliminating any provisions limiting the number of AM or FM broadcast stations which may be owned or controlled by one entity nationally.
(b) LOCAL RADIO DIVERSITY- (1) APPLICABLE CAPS- The Commission shall revise section
73.3555(a) of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555) to provide that--
(A) in a radio market with 45 or more commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 8 commercial radio stations, not more than 5 of which are in the same service (AM or FM);
(B) in a radio market with between 30 and 44 (inclusive) commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 7 commercial radio stations, not more than 4 of which are in the same service (AM or FM);
(C) in a radio market with between 15 and 29 (inclusive) commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 6 commercial radio stations, not more than 4 of which are in the same service (AM or FM); and
(D) in a radio market with 14 or fewer commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 5 commercial radio stations, not more than 3 of which are in the same service (AM or FM), except that a party may not own, operate, or control more than 50 percent of the stations in such market.
(2) EXCEPTION- Notwithstanding any limitation authorized by this subsection, the Commission may permit a person or entity to own, operate, or control, or have a cognizable interest in, radio broadcast stations if the Commission determines that such ownership, operation, control, or interest will result in an increase in the number of radio broadcast stations in operation.
(c) TELEVISION OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS- (1) NATIONAL OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS- The Commission shall
modify its rules for multiple ownership set forth in section 73.3555 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555)--
(A) by eliminating the restrictions on the number of television stations that a person or entity may directly or indirectly own, operate, or control, or have a cognizable interest in, nationwide; and
(B) by increasing the national audience reach limitation for television stations to 35 percent.
(2) LOCAL OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS- The Commission shall conduct a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether to retain, modify, or eliminate its limitations on the number of television stations that a person or entity may own, operate, or control,
or have a cognizable interest in, within the same television
market. (d) RELAXATION OF ONE-TO-A-MARKET- With respect to its
enforcement of its one-to-a-market ownership rules under section 73.3555 of its regulations, the Commission shall extend its waiver policy to any of the top 50 markets, consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
(e) DUAL NETWORK CHANGES- The Commission shall revise section 73.658(g) of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 658(g)) to permit a television broadcast station to affiliate with a person or entity that maintains 2 or more networks of television broadcast stations
unless such dual or multiple networks are composed of-- (1) two or more persons or entities that, on the date of
enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, are `networks' as defined in section 73.3613(a)(1) of the Commission's regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3613(a)(1)); or
(2) any network described in paragraph (1) and an English-language program distribution service that, on such date, provides 4 or more hours of programming per week on a national basis pursuant to network affiliation arrangements with local television broadcast stations in markets reaching more than 75 percent of television homes (as measured by a national ratings service).
(f) CABLE CROSS OWNERSHIP- (1) ELIMINATION OF RESTRICTIONS- The Commission shall revise
section 76.501 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 76.501) to permit a person or entity to own or control a network of broadcast stations and a cable system.
(2) SAFEGUARDS AGAINST DISCRIMINATION- The Commission shall revise such regulations if necessary to ensure carriage, channel positioning, and nondiscriminatory treatment of nonaffiliated broadcast stations by a cable system described in
paragraph (1). (g) LOCAL MARKETING AGREEMENTS- Nothing in this section shall be
construed to prohibit the origination, continuation, or renewal of any television local marketing agreement that is in compliance with the regulations of the Commission.
(h) FURTHER COMMISSION REVIEW- The Commission shall review its rules adopted pursuant to this section and all of its ownership

- Of 257 news/talk stations owned by top five commercial station owners, 91% of total weekday talk programming is conservative, and 9% is progressive
- Each weekday, 2,570 hours of conservative talk is broadcast compared to 254 hours of progressive talk
- In Top 10 radio markets, 76% of programming is conservative and 24% is progressive
(Source: Center for American Progress and Free Press)

Certainot would also like us to waste our resources on "picket(ing) the stations, get university sports off them, and boycott and shame local sponsors until the stations can't pay overhead and limbaugh is elevated to head of the GOP" when the real solution is to break up ownership.

- Ownership is most important variable contributing to imbalance in programming
- stations owned by women, minorities, or local owners are statistically less likely to air conservative hosts or shows
- stations controlled by group owners, those with stations in multiple markets, or those with three stations in a single market were statistically more like to air conservative talk
(Source: Center for American Progress and Free Press)

[certainot]

154. i'm beginning to think you're troll, worried about real challenge to RW radio

assuming you're not, here's the deal- it's a catch 22 situation

you think you're going to break up ownership while ignoring RW radio? and global warming can't wait. good luck. progressives and dem reps have tried to prevent and tried to reverse deregulation, and the biggest obstruction for ongoing or future efforts will continue to be driven on RW talk radio - because there is NO organized challenge to it from the left.

don't you think that's pretty fucking stupid- NO organized opposition to the right's best weapon?

in case you don't get it, the right controls media and can message over and around everything the left can do and the most important part of that is talk radio. the republicans have been able to beat back all attempts to fix media and with citizens united it's gotten worse.

RW talk radio is their best tool and without it they're fucked and democracy can work. it is the difference maker. as long as the lazy naive left wants to ignore talk radio because it gives them a headache to listen to it we can't have an honest national discussion about media reform or election reform or any other major reform and there will be fewer and fewer repub reps willing to do the right thing or compromise. once the talk radio monopoly got going after reagan killed the fairness doctrine it paved the way for the monopolization you don't like, whether you think it had anything to do with forcing clinton to deregulate or not.

[OnyxCollie]

165. "Lazy naive left"

You're a real charmer, aren't you? Your name wouldn't happen to be Rahm, would it?

Obama Does Not Support Return of Fairness Doctrine
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/114322-Obama_Does_Not_Support_Return_of_Fairness_Doctrine.php

"Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," press secretary Michael Ortiz said in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.

"He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible," Ortiz added. "That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."

If Obama was serious about that, maybe he shouldn't have had Bush retreads in his administration.

F.C.C. Commissioner Leaving to Join Comcast
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/f-c-c-commissioner-to-join-comcast/

Meredith Attwell Baker, a former Commerce Department official who worked on telecommunications issues in George W. Bush’s administration, announced that she would leave the F.C.C. when her term expires at the end of June. At Comcast, she will serve as senior vice president for government affairs for NBC Universal, which Comcast acquired in January.

The announcement drew immediate criticism from some groups that had opposed the Comcast-NBC merger. They said the move was indicative of an ethically questionable revolving door between regulatory agencies and the companies they oversee.

The revolving door between government and the lobbyists who seek to influence public policy and legislation on behalf of companies or other organizations was a target of reform by President Obama even before he took office. During the 2008 campaign, he vowed to “close the revolving door” and “clean up both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue” with “the most sweeping ethics reform in history.”

Though Ms. Baker was appointed to what is considered an independent regulatory agency, she signed the administration’s ethics pledge upon taking office in July 2009. Under the pledge, she will not be allowed to lobby anyone at the F.C.C. for two years after her departure.

You think I'm a RW troll? Well, if you check my profile, you'll see I've been here for six years, and you can search my posts to see that I'm not a troll.

I went to check your profile and found that it's hidden. A quick Google search reveals all you post is RW radio screeds on DU, Kos, and Huffington Post.

One-trick pony, indeed.

[certainot]

189. i've been observing it for 20+ years, long enough to see it beat the crap out of liberal reps

and ideas year after year while the collective left ignores it, and it is my interest, and since few others are i figure i'll keep it up.

do you have any response to anything i've written besides telling the obvious? that we need media reform? that politics is a game of compromises and a lot of mistakes? that in politics, leaving the opponents best weapon completely unapposed is plain stupid?

maybe you don't seem to understand that obama is as good as it gets for now and good luck winning an election with kucinich or sanders or nader. it'd be nice but the left would once again allow team limbaugh to swiftboat them to their heart's content while rigging more elections. and then whine about it later.

i'll repeat again - you won't get any major reforms in anything if you're going to wait for a kucinich to win a national election and then think he will get them through a deadlocked congress.

[OnyxCollie]

213. If you're going to hijack a thread

(This thread was about hacking a DRE, remember?) to persuade people to follow your pet issue, don't act like a douche bag when you do it.

The "lazy naive left", as you like to call them, was not responsible for the current RW radio clusterfuck. Bill "Third Way/DLC" Clinton signed the Telecommunications Deregulation Act into law; he's the one responsible. (And don't give me any excuses- "He was hamstrung! He was forced to do it!"- Compromising in return for shit is SOP for the DLC.) Blaming the left for the DLC's corporate sell-out fiasco is like blaming unions for the current debt debacle.

Telling people to picket stations to fight RW radio is like telling people to unplug their electronics to stop global warming. It might make people feel empowered, but in the big picture it's a waste of resources and accomplishes little.

And if you've been observing this for 20+ years, you know that too.

[certainot]

216. you are a twit. everything the left wants is lessened because it ignores RW radio

"Telling people to picket stations to fight RW radio is like telling people to unplug their electronics to stop global warming."

that's a nice line but how is it the same? how is it relevant? that's the dumbest piece of shit in years. you're an idiot.

"It might make people feel empowered, but in the big picture it's a waste of resources and accomplishes little."

what the fuck do you know? except what limbaugh says?

[OnyxCollie]

217. You're cute when you get mad.

Dance for me. I find it entertaining.

[BradBlog]

182. You are absolutely right...

...Though it's not a matter of "Left" radio challenging RW radio. It's a matter of restoring OUR public airwaves to we, the people, rather than the corporations who now believe, and act as if, they own them.

But that's probably what you meant.

[certainot]

186. yep AMERICANS need to get it done

[jwirr]

105. How many states are still using Diebold voting machines?

[OnyxCollie]

106. We need to look forward, not backward.

Diebold Sells U.S. Elections Systems Business to ES&S
http://news.diebold.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=5006

NORTH CANTON, Ohio, Sept. 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Diebold, Incorporated (NYSE: DBD) announced today that it has sold its U.S. election systems business, primarily consisting of its Allen, Texas-based subsidiary, Premier Election Solutions, Inc., to Election Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S), a leading company in the election systems industry. The sale was consummated on September 2.

HART INTERCIVIC, INC.,
Plaintiff,

v.

DIEBOLD, INCORPORATED and
ELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE, INC.
Defendants.
http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/pdf/09/0916hart.pdf

The transaction also poses a significant and imminent threat of irreparable harm to the other vendors like Hart serving less than 20% of voting precincts, harm to the political subdivisions that constitute the jurisdictions that must purchase voting machines and election systems, and, ultimately, harm to the voters of the United States, in the form of loss of confidence in the integrity and security of the means by which elections are performed.

Justice Department Requires Key Divestiture in Election Systems & Software/Premier Election Solutions Merger
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/March/10-at-235.html

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice announced today that it will require Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to divest voting equipment systems assets it
purchased in September 2009 from Premier Election Solutions Inc. in order to restore competition. The assets to be divested include the means to produce all versions of Premier’s hardware, software and firmware used to record, tabulate, transmit or report votes, including the Assure 1.2 system, and a license to better serve disabled voters. The department said that today’s settlement will restore competition in voting equipment systems in the United States and that, without the divestiture, the acquisition would result in higher prices, lower quality and a reduced incentive to innovate.

For those keeping score, the authors of HAVA have:

Been convicted of bribery and corruption for deals with Jack Abramoff and sentenced to 30 months in prison- Rep. Bob Ney

Been convicted of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering to get repub candidates elected, and have received a sentence of three years in prison- Rep. Tom DeLay (See also DeLay's ties to Abramoff.)

Run for President (poorly)- Sen. Chris Dodd. Dodd was apparently under the impression that being a "Friend of Angelo" Mozilo of Countrywide and writing the bill that would allow a privately-owned, highly partisan corporation to use secret, proprietary software to count our votes was enough to endear him to the Powers That Be. It was not. He did worse than Kucinich.

Business and financial ties with ES&S, the company that has a monopoly on vote counting in the US- Sen. Chuck Hagel

Now, given all of the above, and the fact that every time an "anomaly" occurs with these electronic voting machines it benefits Republicans, why has the Obama administration not enforced its order for ES&S to divest? It seems highly irrational to not be concerned about the survival of one's own party.

[The_Casual_Observer]

107. Are there any actual statements/reports from Argonne on this?

The reference to Argonne on that video looks bogus. Was the work done by an employee of Argonne on his spare time?

[newspeak]

110. so, you have repugs yelling voter fraud and

changing laws across the country to disenfranchise even more voters, when it's been electoral fraud along. Very few cases of voter fraud (hey but there's ann coulter), but electoral fraud and disenfranchisement is a major concern. And guess who is complicit? can we term this country banana republic now?

Repugs could care less how they win, as long as they win--it's all about the power and the greed.

[DeSwiss]

113. What perfect technological synergy.

- Now Americans can vote without leaving the couch......

K&R

[Hubert Flottz]

116. Diebold needs to refund the money that every state paid for that

crooked junk.

[Overseas]

142. Yes please!

That's a great idea.

[raouldukelives]

123. K&R

[orbitalman]

130. Why are there STILL touch screen machines?????????

[defendandprotect]

136. Great question -- !!! Let's ask the Democrats -- !!!

[vets74]

163. You think Democrats buy the machines in REPUBLICAN areas ?????

Or have much say in it ?

Damn....

[defendandprotect]

205. You think they shouldn't have a say about it -- ???? Wow!!

How about if you were facing the GOP computers -- wouldn't you be at least

bringing up the subject of computer hacking -- and remote hacking?


ROFL

[valerief]

169. Because with them, rich people get richer and that's the most important thing in the world. nt

[caseymoz]

134. They should dismantle all those machines

And he's right. It is a Homeland Security issue.

[iamthebandfanman]

137. was wondering when

this kind of reporting was going to resurface...

after 2000 there was a lot of it and i was hopeful for real reform..

by and after 2004 the subject seemed to go by the wayside to most people again... :(


glad theres more reporting!

[rasputinkhlyst]

138. Great...write out the instructions and distribute widely two days

before the election so they have to take those crooked machines down or be forced to face the counter-consequences. Hell folks from Pakistan could be controlling these machines in the elections for all we know. This in addition to the untraceable cash from the Chambers of Commerce.

[Dutchmaster]

140. Been talking about this for years.

Usually to people with the "you're a conspiracy theorist aren't you?" looks on their faces.

[Blue Owl]

141. Kathy Nickolaus and her special remote control purse

C'mon you elected Democrats, could it be any more obvious the Republicans are LYING, CHEATING, and STEALING???

Here's an idea -- do something about it, make a big public stink for once. Get a lawsuit and investigation started NOW.

[fascisthunter]

143. If Nothing is Done to rid us of these machines....

...I will know for sure our democracy is being rigged. You idiots in office have dismissed our concerns for long enough!

[David Sky]

144. This is probably how Bush won in Ohio in 2004!

And, thus, won the election to a second term!
This or some similar device.
I'm sure of it now.

[colsohlibgal]

145. Obviousness

I became pretty paranoid when I saw democrat officials all over the country eagerly sign on to this easily tampered with voting system. I mean, what could go wrong? How dumb can you be......or is there more to it?

It has been proven time and again that anyone with the equipment and know how can easily tamper with the vote.

People always seem to forget the truism uttered by a man who knew of what he spoke, old Joe Stalin,who said that the power was not with the people who voted but rather with the people who counted those votes.

We need paper ballots, with strict above board verifiable custody afterward, and public counting witnessed by the contestants and also by neutral observers.

Just starting with the election of 2000, if this system had been in place, how different things would have been be in 2011...assuming Big Al lived out his tenure.

[newspeak]

159. I care not if it takes one or two weeks to determine a winner

rather take that long then have a bunch of talking heads calling it within so many hours-just like what happened with little boots and gore. And now we know Gore won but the supremes stopped the count. So, little boot's only by the supreme court became president and look where we are today.

Of course, down in florida, still had the disenfranchisement, the intimidation, and don't forget those butterfly ballots. I'm waiting for a world monitoring team to come to the US and monitors our elections like they do in some third world countries.

[BradBlog]

180. It doesn't. Even if every ballot is PUBLICLY hand-counted as it should be...

For example, in New Hampshire, where some 40% of the towns count publicly, by hand, at the precinct, in front of everyone, often the results are in from those towns before the Diebold towns are done!

Don't buy the straw-man, red-herring argument that hand-counted paper ballots at the precincts "takes longer". There's no real evidence to support that claim, that I'm aware of.

[newspeak]

228. you're right bradblog

I remember the election in california for governor. Those precincts that didn't have the machines, some were in before the machine counts and people were wondering why the machine counts were taking so long.

[SpankMe]

151. So easy, even a Republican can do it. n/t

[LittleGirl]

153. I hope this goes viral

Love the bradblog! Thanks for your service to this country! You are a treasure.

[BradBlog]

183. Thanks much, LG! Very much appreciated! (n/t)

[Electric Monk]

156. Well, just stop teaching science after 7th grade then

I kid, of course.

k&r

Every American should know about this.

[Mosaic]

157. Kill Diebold Now!

Stop the madness and kill these machines now!

[bobthedrummer]

162. K&R Anyone else wonder where Susan Bonzon Ralston is today?

She was quite a techie for Karl et. al.

Susan B. Ralston (Source Watch profile)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Susan_B._Ralston

For the record and in keeping with what we know, so far, here are Karl's girls (Fridays Child thread started 3-31-07)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x548152

[JohnWxy]

164. WE MUST STOP ADOPTION OF ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES! THERE IS NO WAY TO BE

SURE THEY ARE NOT RIGGED TO TALLEY VOTES DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY WERE CAST. NO ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES!

[ProgressivePhil]

167. This is why!

This is exactly why we shouldn't use touch screen voting that doesn't have a paper trail!

[elleng]

168. I've sent this to my congress-critters, and posted to my journal. HELP!

I am a strong supporter, and appreciate the work you're doing now and have done over the years.

A most critical matter has come to my attention, I must share it with you, and I must strongly encourage you to address this matter with ALL your Democratic colleagues, and even Republicans who you think might be receptive.

A recent study has come to light, confirming that Diebold voting machines can be EASILY hacked, for about $26 in equipment and with little technical knowledge.

Sir, we CANNOT have another debacle such as we've seen in the past. Its clear Republicans will do whatever they can do to achieve their goals.

Please read the attached, raise the alarm, and protect us from losing our democracy.

Thank you

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/elections/2011/09/27/votinghack/index.html

[YvonneCa]

188. I hate to be a cynic, but...

...I did the same in 2002 and 2004, to no avail. I wish you luck... :(

[elleng]

190. Good for your previous work.

ME, luck? ALL of us, MORE than luck; Our COUNTRY!

[YvonneCa]

197. Most people are still asleep on this...

...issue. It will take a lot to awaken them, IMHO.

[elleng]

198. Probably right. Damn

Have to get to DNC.

[No Elephants]

224. Psst. The DNC knows.

[elleng]

227. And we ought to hammer them/it about it,

[YvonneCa]

236. I agree, but if the hammering is not done...

...by a large enough majority, they will continue to ignore it.

[elleng]

238. Yes, which is why I've posted several times at DU,

written my congress-critters, encouraged DU Floridians to do same to Deb W-S, and solicit ideas from DUers+. Think I'll write DNC + Howard Dean.

[YvonneCa]

239. All great things...

...to do. I wish you much luck. Here is what one guy did...

http://www.johnennis.tv/video/free-for-all/


Wish I had his energy... :)

[No Elephants]

225. Ordinary folks, yes. "Congresscritters," no. The latter are very well aware of this.

[YvonneCa]

235. I agree. n/t

[No Elephants]

223. I don't get it.

Did you write and send that because you thought that Congress folk, Democratic or Republican, who get their jobs only by elections, are not aware of election fraud?

[icymist]

171. This is where all this shit started!

That's where the democracy began to really be stolen! It wasn't the 2000 election nor ronald reagan. It was here, the fraud of the election system itself!

[myrna minx]

172. K&R n/t

[below the beltway]

175. Fight back now.

Between voting machine hacking and specious state legislation designed to discourage minorities from voting, we have a long hard road ahead of us. It's not too early to start fighting back! What can we do? Can anyone suggest a site to share on FB?

[bvar22]

176. Over 92% of the American People support Transparent Verifiable Elections...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

An EASY WIN/WIN for either dominant Political Party,
and yet,
ABSOLUTE SILENCE from the Leadership of BOTH Status Quo Parties.

After the Stolen Election in 2000, and the "questionable" election in 2004,
any rational American would believe that Election Security would be a RED HOT Front Burner Issue with the Democratic Party,
but NO.
There are even MORE hackable Black Boxes NOW than before the Dems took the MAJORITY and the White House!


WHY is there no "change"??
Because our RICH, Elite Class Politicians of BOTH Parties WANT it that way.

[saras]

185. It only cost as much as $26 because they bought all the parts new.

It's also possible to build the entire circuit into the voting machine's "regular" circuitry. Without outside auditing and visible hardware and software, there's no way to know whether this possibility is built in by the manufacturer or not.

And it's not like this is the ONLY way - it's just another easy, cheap way that doesn't require too much skill or money.

[moondust]

191. K/R

Thanks to Brad for not giving up.

:yourock:

[Luciferous]

193. K&R

[glinda]

194. Kick for "fixing" this problem asap.

[senseandsensibility]

195. Heard Thom Hartmann talk about this and give you credit today!

Great job, and keep this kicked!

[CarrieLynne]

201. they manage to make ATM machines that are fine, why not these?

[Ellipsis]

202. Because of the anonymity involved in casting your vote.

[Initech]

208. To me this is scarier than anything al-Qaeda could ever dream of.

[vets74]

212. Y'ALL GET STUPID AND DON'T VOTE, HEA' !!!

This flaw is more difficult to implement than the article implies. You would need to simulate a vote for the candidate you're cheating for, then program the system to replicate that vote. If a voting machine cast 100% of its votes for one ticket that would likely be observed in the tally system.

Break into the tally system... that's a huge problem if/when it occurs.

[BradBlog]

215. I don't think you understand the problem...

There is no need to change 100% of the votes. (Not that anybody would likely notice even if you did.)

There is no need to "simulate" anything. If you bother reading the original article at Salon, or watching the video, after the voter has approved all votes on the confirmation screen, etc., when they hit "Cast Vote", the screen blanks for a split second, votes are changed and registered into the system as the "Cast Vote" button is ascended.

But, by all means, downplay the concerns about the, oh, dozen or so different ways we've now shown that these systems can be be manipulated.

Oh, and, btw, I interviewed Roger Johnston of Argonne Labs today on my KPFK show and he says that the same thing can be done with op-scan systems as well as touch screens. Interview can be heard here: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8790

So, HEA'!!!

[vets74]

219. The real problem... is Ohio.

GOPer strategy is to win the South and the Mountain states and win/buy/steal Ohio.

The outside money that gets spent in Ohio has already started ramping up.

Mailers by the hundreds. Tens of thousands of dollars for every one of the fundies churches. Tens of millions for the anti-abortion fronts.

The Ron Paul false front "libertarian" scam gets pumped up.

"Independent" candidates get signatures to run in Ohio local races, siphoning off Democratic Party votes 2-to-1.

Anything and everything. Ohio is the whole show.

Btw: the risk from the wire intercept is tiny compared to the risk from getting into the tally boxes.

There's no evidence with those invasions -- once the machines are turned off anyway. Reboot removes everything.

[No Elephants]

226. LOL!

[windowpilot]

220. Kick

[Stuart G]

240. this one should never die.........................nt