BBV looks like good news

[alfredo]

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,60864,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

In the wake of concerns raised about security flaws in electronic voting systems, a lobbying group is strategizing a public relations and lobbying campaign to help voting companies "repair short-term damage done by negative reports and media coverage."


In a surprise move, according to one vendor, companies are reversing their long-time opposition to giving voters paper receipts as a way to verify electronic voting results, a change critics have been seeking for months.


We just need to make sure they do it right.

[DEMActivist]

1. Looks like they paid the ITAA the 200K

According to a draft plan produced by the Information Technology Association of America, a lobbying and trade association for the tech industry, electronic voting machine makers are discussing ways to convince state election officials that their products are the gold standard and worthy of taxpayer money.

The plan calls for a media campaign to "generate positive public perception" of the companies and to "reduce substantially the level and amount of criticism from computer scientists and other security experts about the fallibility of electronic voting systems."

(from the original link)

[DEMActivist]

3. Go David Dill!!!!

David Dill, a computer science professor at Stanford University who runs a website called VerifiedVoting.org, said: "The voting machine industry doesn't have a PR problem. It has a technology problem. It is impossible to determine whether their machines, in their current form, can be trusted with our elections."

Instead of trying to convince people the machines are safe, the industry should fix the technology and restore public confidence by "making the voting process transparent, improving certification standards for the equipment and (ensuring) there is some way to do a recount if there is a question about an election," Dill said.

[punpirate]

2. When they stop using the word "receipt" and...

... start using the word "ballot" and start lobbying for that to be the official ballot of record, then they're going in the right direction. *smile*

Cheers.

[alfredo]

7. that's doing it right.

We need to make sure they know the difference, that a receipt mean nothing, but a companion*, ballot does.

*reflecting what the machine has received from you.

[JohnGideon]

4. Ballot not Receipt; Verified not Verifiable

Words! Words! Words! But important words with important differences.

[VelmaD]

5. I already get a receipt...

when I vote electronically in Austin. I want a fuckin' ballot. Grr...

[Andy_Stephenson]

6. Voter Verified Paper Ballot

nothing more...nothing less.

[Gordon25]

8. Because...

...should the need arise: You Can't Hand Count Electrons.

Gordon25

[peacetalksforall]

9. I don't understand why anyone says a paper ballot is enough

What if you get your paper ballot and a glitch occurs that is 'fixed' by who knows who using who knows what instructions. AND what if the votes are not counted and transferred accurately or are hacked?

I don't get it.

There are many facets to the farce.

[JohnGideon]

10. The Paper Ballot...

Is printed out and verified by the voter. It is then put in a locked ballot box for audit/recount purposes. If there is a problem with the machine, the audit will catch it.

This is exactly why a "receipt" is not worth anything. The receipt in their thinking is just a slip of paper with a code on it. They say that you can then take it to your County Auditor anytime after the election and they can run that code and show you who you voted for so you can audit yourself. That does NO good as the count is over, you took the receipt home with you, and any mistakes are your word against the computers. Who are they going to believe?

[Changenow]

11. Reciepts mean nothing at all.

There is no way they could be used for a recount, they would promote vote selling (and who has the money?) and it is impossible to know that the vote entered is the same as the vote recorded on the reciept.

[Spazito]

12. I am not sure this really is as good as it looks when you take this part..

The plan calls for a media campaign to "generate positive public perception" of the companies and to "reduce substantially the level and amount of criticism from computer scientists and other security experts about the fallibility of electronic voting systems."


The words "generate positive public perception" say, to me, that the plan is to sell the idea of the electronic voting systems being secure, etc. That is a far cry from actually producing systems that ARE secure, with a VVPB.

[JohnGideon]

13. This Article Is Written For The Industry and not The People

It's good news for them but nothing for us. Except for one thing; if no one had been standing up they wouldn't have to go to this length. So, we are making headway. They are running scared. They do have one advantage and that's money so we have to attack them 'grassroots'. The basis for any good activist program, get the people involved, talk to everyone, convince people, spread the word. When they roll completely over and give us what we want then it is good news.

[Spazito]

14. I agree, to see them having to confront the concerns is the first step...

we now have to continue to call any "feel good" press releases, etc. exactly what they are, fluff and coverup. We have to continue to say, imo, glad you are hearing us, now fix the systems, incorporate a VVPB.

I remember reading at some point, on DU, that there was this meeting of all the big names in the electronic voting systems, someone was able to listen in, and the whole emphasis was on PR, not on addressing the real concerns. I believe this is the result of that meeting. I wonder if anyone has that info on hand?

[Andy_Stephenson]

16. here you go...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0308/S00175.htm

[Spazito]

18. Thanks GBNC! That's the one!

So, we can gather, by this current story, the plan has gone beyond the "drawing board" and into action.

[Andy_Stephenson]

22. Looks like it to me n/t

[creativelcro]

15. Yes, I agree but...

If half of us support Holt while the other half complains it sucks and fight opposite battles, then the net result will be zero... The differences may be all due to different pockets of ignorance by different people... The bottom line is that there has to be a common direction of the "grassroot", otherwise it is ineffective by defnition. How to do that ?... -C

[GregD]

21. I can't agree more

They have one company making a commitment to do something that should have been a fundamental requirement in the first place...

<<<"Nobody in the industry would argue that security is not a primary objective.... It's not just the right thing to do, it's also increasingly a market imperative.">>>

First-year programmers understand the need to develop secure applications that can be tested and audited for accuracy. If you are a developer in the banking industry (Diebold ATMs) you don't even get the job if you don't have demonstrable experience in planning/implementing systems with such transparent and auditable schemes. And the QA process in the banking and other industries would not tolerate the sort of stuff that reviews of Diebold's code has revealed.

The notion that these people even approached such critically important applications without the basic considerations being "assumed as mandatory" speaks volumes toward the industries approach toward these products.

BTW, Kim Zetter was at the Sec of State meeting in Sacramento a couple weeks ago, and is very well informed on this stuff. She served as a poll-worker in Alameda County for the Recall election. Much more material was included in the original article that she presented to her editor, then actually wound up in the finished product. I believe that if folks have specific questions, that she is willing to answer those.

Peace...

[Bushfire]

17. Check out www.verifiedvoting.org

http://verifiedvoting.org/stateview.asp?state=IL

Take IL for example, activists are keeping the pressure on all the reps to sign onto HR2239. It seems to be updated daily for those that are undecided. The word is spreading!!!

[creativelcro]

19. I'm checking the list

every day!! :)
Please, go to the "Problems with Holt's bill" thread and discuss some of the issues there. I posted a few notes, but we may need more ammo. Thanks. -C

[GregD]

20. We sent out a call for action

About a week ago, we mailed to our list and asked for widespread pressure in order to seek action before Congress recesses at the end of the month.

The result was amazing - a ton of people wrote back, and they are gradually reporting in with results.

In one case, the first person that contacted OREGON's Rep Darlene Hooley told us that Hooley sounded convinced that this was an important bill. The next person that called the Hooley was told that they were now a co-sponsor.

To date, it looks like 5 co-sponsors have been gained in a week.

If anyone wishes to help, please write to [e-mail]

Thanks