Princeton researchers show how to steal an election with Diebold machines

[BlueEyedSon]

via BoingBoing

Princeton security researchers Ariel J. Feldman, J. Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten have taken apart one of Diebold's notorious voting machines and done a thorough security analysis of its workings. They showed that they could easily install software on the machine that would allow an attacker to steal votes from one candidate and give them to another -- they showed that this would be undetectable, and easily done. They've published a paper and an amazing, disturbing video showing how this could be done.

This paper presents a fully independent security study of a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine, including its hardware and software. We obtained the machine from a private party. Analysis of the machine, in light of real election procedures, shows that it is vulnerable to extremely serious attacks. For example, an attacker who gets physical access to a machine or its removable memory card for as little as one minute could install malicious code; malicious code on a machine could steal votes undetectably, modifying all records, logs, and counters to be consistent with the fraudulent vote count it creates. An attacker could also create malicious code that spreads automatically and silently from machine to machine during normal election activities--a voting-machine virus. We have constructed working demonstrations of these attacks in our lab. Mitigating these threats will require changes to the voting machine's hardware and software and the adoption of more rigorous election procedures.

Link to blurb: http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/13/princeton_researcher.html

Link to report: http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/

on edit: Prof. Ed Felton is one of the top computer security guys in the world.

[SpiralHawk]

1. k and r

This could definitely be posted in GD politics. Thank you.

[yellerpup]

2. K&R!

It's not a tin foil hat conspiracy when it's true. :kick: :kick: :kick: Kick for Princeton!

[Ezlivin]

3. Kick, kick, kick!

Someone on the "good" side should tamper with the election and ensure some bizarre results. What would people say if Popeye or some other mythical character "won" the election?

[ktlyon]

18. I agree, if we can't catch them then let's catch one of our own

but inputting bizarre results would be good.

[Benhurst]

4. Recommended #12 NT

[DoctorMyEyes]

5. Is the audio portion messed up for anyone else?

I want to send this on but am afraid some of the people I'd like to see it won't put up with the "skippy" audio. Is it just me, or is anyone else having this problem?

[hootinholler]

6. bedtime reading, thanks!

[eppur_se_muova]

7. K&R for more attention. eom

[StraightDope]

8. This is the best news that I've heard in a long time...

It's about time that Academia came out against electronic voting. What's so goddamn hard about using paper ballots and having a hand count that takes a few weeks? The President et al. don't take office until months after the election. Completely transparent voting would be worth it...

[hunter]

19. WTF???

Just because you were not paying attention or didn't see it on CNN doesn't mean it didn't happen. Most of the computer scientists I know were very upset when they first encountered these machines. Quite a few of them went on to become very active in their opposition to these machines.

[Danger Mouse]

9. Big surprise...

...or not. I went to college at JHU, and the academics were practically shitting themselves when these voting machines came out. Of course, who listens to academics?
Oh well. :kick:

[snot]

14. Really? Did they express themselves on the 'net?

Because lots of us were certainly looking for evidence and info, and for a painfully long time, it seemed the only guy out there Steven Freeman.

[Wednesdays]

10. Not only did they say it was possible...

these two guys on a cable TV computer show actually demonstrated how election fraud could occur with the machines via several different methods! I wish I recorded the program and all, I was just stunned.

I think it was on a cable network like HGTV about 3 years ago, but I can't remember excactly what show and my google seaches haven't helped. Maybe someone out there remembers that show, too. It's entirely possible the guys--as well as their findings--got buried down the memory hole like so much else these days.

[BeFree]

11. Trust me

It's not a problem.

The republicans who bought these machines wouldn't allow such crap to be used in the US. Especially not in the banking business, and that is the business Diebold is in, right?

So trust me when I tell you that there is no way in hell this could ever pose a problem.... they just wouldn't allow it to happen.

[Cookie wookie]

12. more from the report

"Our demonstration vote-stealing applications can easily be generalized to steal votes on behalf of a particular party rather than a fixed candidate, to steal votes only in certain elections or only at certain dates or times, to steal votes only or preferentially from certain parties or candidates, to steal a fixed fraction of votes rather than trying to ensure a fixed percentage result, to randomize the percentage of votes stolen, and so on. Even if the attacker knows nothing about the candidates or parties, he may know that he wants to reduce the influence of voters in certain places. He can do this by creating malicious code that randomly switches a percentage of the votes, and installing that code only in those places. Any desired algorithm can be used to determine which votes to steal and to which candidate or candidates to transfer the stolen votes."



http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/

[In Truth We Trust]

13. Paper ballots and Hand counts NOW!!!

[mom cat]

17. There should be lawsuits demanding paper only ballots in all

places those damned cheat machines are used. This is downright criminal!

[Kurovski]

15. K&R & bookmarked.

:kick:

[ClintonTyree]

16. An honest oversight on Diebold's part, I'm sure.

Although they DID guarantee Bush victory in Ohio. :eyes: Nah, a Republican owned Corporation would NEVER stoop so low as to rig elections in their favor. :sarcasm:

Please tell me, why is ANY State still using these machines that can be so easily tampered with? Anyone? Anyone? :shrug:

On an even playing field I doubt Republicans would win another Presidential Race for decades to come. On an even playing field. Yeah, right. Republicans do everything in their power to rig elections, it's in their DNA. :mad:

[Kablooie]

20. Hey! Don't tell people about this!

Just distribute cards with the program set to let Democrats win.

Diebold is really on our side you see.

[The Count]

21. Keep it in mind afte election day when " Dems lost because soft on terra"

propaganda will start. Diebold will be "soft on terra in 2006". It was "values voters " in 2004 and "honor & dignitude' in 2000 (although there, other means were mostly employed)
Remember, some dems will jump the bandwagon.

[calmblueocean]

22. I just e-mailed Brian Williams at [e-mail]...

Lately, Brian Williams has been paying a lot more attention to e-mail. I forwarded this link, and suggested they make the security of our voting procedures one of their regular, recurring features, like "Pain at the Pump". Maybe if many more people do the same, they actually will. This video is absolutely chilling. How bitterly ironic is it that while we have men and women dying in the name of democracy in Iraq, we're letting it slip away at home without a whisper?

Sometimes I think the mainstream media won't take this seriously until Donald Duck is elected president.