All Diebold Touch-Screen Systems Impounded by Judge in PA County

[BradBlog]

Source: BRAD BLOG



All Diebold Touch-Screen Systems Impounded by Judge in PA County
Straight-Party Ticket Votes Failed to Allow Voters to Review Names of Presidential Candidates Before Casting 'Ballot'
Same Flawed, Hackable, Unverifiable Machines Being Used in GA Senate Race, Elsewhere...

All 185 of the completely unverifiable Diebold touch-screen voting machines used in Northumberland County, PA's election were ordered impounded by a judge Tuesday night after complaints from both the Republican and Democratic parties. Officials from both parties had filed requested action following reports from voters that straight-party ticket votes were not showing voters the names of their selection for President on the summary screen near the end of the 100% faith-based touch-screen voting process.

The same unverifiable machines made by Diebold were used in a number of states, including the entirety of Georgia where a run-off has been scheduled following a tight race for the U.S. Senate there. The same models were also found, by a landmark Princeton study in 2006, to be easily susceptible to malicious viruses that could result in a flipped election which would be difficult, if not impossible, to discover...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6643

Read more: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6643

[unpossibles]

1. good news! nt

[IndyOp]

2. Great! It is a miracle we got the Presidential result we did. Now is the time to collect

evidence of machine unreliability and gird our loins for dumping unreliable, unverifiable systems!

[catgirl]

3. I wonder if the same thing happened in Georgia

Perhaps Martin really won the race.

[unapatriciated]

7. If and when we have a run off I want paper ballots!

we have the time and people to count them.

[Stevepol]

8. You be the judge: GA uses completely unverifiable Premier (Diebold) machines which...

are trivially easy to hack, patch, or fraudulently program, especially by insiders WITHOUT ANY POSSIBILITY OF DETECTION.

If you had that power over the election, as an insider, what would you do?

[BradBlog]

12. Exact same machines used there...

And yup, I'd be very concerned about the numbers being reported by them...

[Realityhack]

4. Diebold should face treason charges. They should use RICO to stick it to all of them. n/t

[RC]

5. At least wholesale Election Fraud.

There needs to be some people in prison over this. And not some supervisor flunky either.

[aquart]

6. I would like that.

Aren't there federal laws about interfering with elections?

[scytherius]

9. PLEASE get rid of these damned things. n/t

nt

[HopeHoops]

10. The "FILL IN THE OVAL" sheets are used for the SAT! IN/OUT of college - why not for voting?

[dreamnightwind]

11. they are

I voted Tuesday on a "fill in the oval" machine, optical scan with machine tabulation. These are plenty hackable, especially the tabulators, or the communications between the precincts and the central tabulator (man-in-the-middle attacks).

For SAT tests, you don't have the most powerful, devious, skilled, and determined forces on the planet trying to influence the outcome of your SAT score. With US elections, you have exactly that.

None of these technologies can ever be completely secure. We don't need them, and we must not tolerate them. Way too big of a risk. And completely unnecessary. It's all about corporate lobbyists and partisan political power plays.

It's time for a Boston Tea Party for these machines, all of them. If the results can't be PROVEN, beyond any possible doubt, to be fair and accurate, we have to get rid of them. It requires no proof of fraud, just the lack of proof of accuracy and security.

We can't let this election lead us into complacency about this. Now's our chance, we have the majority, and we can act to restore confidence in elections, so we can focus on other important issues.

[lelgt60]

13. I agree about the scanners. I'm unclear what you're advocating. n/t

[dreamnightwind]

14. Low-tech

Paper ballots, hand counted. At this point it's the only acceptable solution.

There may emerge a better way in the future, though I don't see how it could ever be truly secure. I'm open-minded enough to consider systems where the security has been completely worked out and every line of code is public, but it isn't here yet and may never be.

In the meantime, it's insane to use insecure systems. Verification and accuracy is way more important than speed (stupid-fast!).

[Realityhack]

16. As far as tabulators go I think that...

they should simply require all of the scanners to be completely open design AND require all ballots go through two scanners manufactured by different companies. No perfect match = manual count of that batch. AND they should spot check batches.

Paper voting rocks.

[Realityhack]

15. Yep. They are.

That is what I voted on. But no 'coding' a=yes b=no stuff to confuse people. I have also voted on complete the arrow forms that are also very voter friendly. Looks something like this.


Obama & Biden (**)

McCain & Palin ( )

or

-===-> Obama & Biden

- -> McCain & Palin