BBV: Diebold's new talking point.

I just heard a story on NPR addressing the Rubin report and the decision by Maryland's Governor to put a $55 million deal on hold until there system is certified by SAIC.

Of course, certification by SAIC means very little unless they get to see the source code, which Diebold refuses to show to anyone.

The high point of the story was Diebold's new "talking point" about this issue, comparing our genuine concern over their cavalier handling of our democracy to Y2K doomsayers.

Let's look at these two points for moment. If Maryland nixes this deal, Diebold stands to loose a $55 million sale.Other states will follow suit, meaning Diebold could lose over $100 million, plus face law suits from Georgia and Alabama for $100 million more. Does anybody really have any doubt that a company CEO will do everything possible including lie through their teeth to save such a sale?

The second point is Diebold now thinks they have a weapon to use against us. "See, these people are loonies. They are the same people that predicted the world would end Jan 1st, 2000. Ignore these people."

This spin ignores a couple of important points:

1) Computer scientist started warning about Y2K in the early 90's, and it was these warnings which spurred Diebold and every other company in the world to review its software and correct date problems ahead of time.

2) While there were still some doomsayers, by 1998 most reputable computer scientists said the issue had been dealt with and expected little fallout from Y2K. The only people hiding in bunkers on Dec 31st, 1999, were the ususal collection of the tinfoil hat brigade.

3) Companies had a major financial incentive to fix Y2K problems since they faced many lawsuits and other financial loses if they didn't. Thanks to the very limited scope of this problem and the secrecy involved, no such threat exists for Diebold this time unless a major failure occurs. Trouble is, with no paper trail, no one will be able to prove anything one way or another.

4) Y2K affected almost every company in the country using mainframe and mini computers, whereas this problem affects less than a half-dozen. Diebold, et al, have a major vested interest in keeping problems secret.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
1237 Elon Place
High Point, NC 27263
http://www.plan9.org

so that if the election goes smoothly, the critics will be proven wrong. Stealing elections smoothly is, of course, just what we're afraid of. They did the same thing in 2002...

"Despite the ominous concerns of critics, the debut of the new touch screen units went remarkably well.." :puke:

...there would have been no repercussions? that we should have saved all that money and just skipped all that Y2K compliance stuff?"

Pretty easy rebuttal, I'd say.

the problem that there's no paper trail with these supposedly infallible machines. I heard the same report, and I felt that it was completely slanted.

because it's a foregone conclusion that SAIC will sweep the real security issues under the rug.

SAIC has already concluded no user verifiable paper audit trail is necessary.

They are simply going through the motions here. The result is inevitable and has already been pre-determined. Convenient fraud is secure in SAIC's hands. I mean, who are you gonna believe -- a huge mil-intel security firm or every computer science major, graduate student, assistant professor, professor and professional who has both integrity and a clear understanding of this subject?

this problem's profile is a *lot* higher than it was a year ago. In fact, I would bet that we have seen more stories on this problem in the 8 months than we saw in the last 13 years.

Also, anybody who loses an election on a Diebold machine is going to go to court at the first whiff of monkey business. Sooner or later, some judge is going to pry open these machines with a court order and when they do, it will be ugly.

The war is not over, but there is blood in the water, and its Diebold's.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
1237 Elon Place
High Point, NC 27263
http://www.plan9.org

There's been three times as many stories published on this in the last three weeks as in the last three years... and in publications that have never before written anything on it. Including the Wash Post and NYT.

It is now on the FP of the Washington Post.

This new talking point from Diebold... is pure desparation... but indicates they are receiving some PR advice for a change and not just making a series of demonstrable and contradictory lies.

It is like Bush trying to explain his lies about Iraq by talking about the crimean war. Any fool can see the events have nothing to do with one another.

Fortunately the public debate on this appears to be proceeding in a sober and sensible fashion. The eyes of the community and the media are now opened - and this issue touches every local county, community and precinct.

David is also dead right that this will eventually end up in court. How could it not.

It is a matter surprise to me that nobody has launched a qui tam lawsuit against these cowboys already. The evidence is all there. Wired magazine could probably be subpeonaed to provide the staff email list that states that they knew a security risk existed in December and yet let the FTP site remain online through to January with no logging of traffic. If that alone is not negligence warranting decertification I cannot imagine what would be. Notwithstanding the ever growing mountain of evidence that the negilgence is infinitely more compounded that this.

al

I was re-reading the various articles over the last few weeks and noticed a strange thing. While numerous computer scientists are quoted opposing Diebold's chicanery, Diebold always responds via spin doctors, PR flaks, corporate drones and the odd exec of two. I have never read an article quoting a Diebold programmer. Has anyone seen such a quote?

David.

Still I expect the SAIC whitewash will be the exception that proves the rule...

or close enough. Armaggedon at least.

Still got a twitch or two, twiddling lips with fingers, etc.

on the topic back in '94, when it seemed nobody was paying the slighest bit of attention to the problem. When I brought it up at a staff meeting where I worked (SE), none of the programmers had ever heard of the problem.

The company then made a ton of money fixing the problem for our clients, which unfortunately, the owner used to support Chimpy McSmirk (one of the reasons I left).

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
1237 Elon Place
High Point, NC 27263
http://www.plan9.org

But it wasn't carried off. The speaker failed to make the connection. Or maybe it is just such a stupid point there is no connection.


Cher

...."You know, the American people can understand your wanting to make a profit. But they can't understand a company making millions by selling flawed election equipment -- equipment that could allow the theft of an election."

....I was reading over on freeperland and they finally have posted the Washington Post article. They're concerned, because they think Dems will exploit the flaw to steal the election.

So this is really a non-partisan issue, and those arguing for an auditable paper trail can claim it to be an American issue.

"Americans won't stand for election fraud." "The American people want open, transparent elections." Yadda yadda.

In fact, they've probably already done it - look at Hillary's election! How could an unelectable carpetbagger win against the highly respectable Lazio? We have to get these machines fixed right away or the immoral Dems will take over the country and turn it into Moscow!!! {/freeper}


Fuck Bush Buttons — The Cronus Connection

to misuse these machines. Just depends on who has the most cash to throw around.

In all the news coverage of this issue in the past two to three weeks, and it is a huge amount, and in all Diebold's statements on the issue, everything Diebold has said has been addressed to the Rubin report.

I have yet to hear or read a single public statement from Diebold about the Harris report which deals with security flaws in the GEMS software used with Diebold's optical scan systems which are in use in 37 states currently.

I would opine the flaws found in the Harris report are far more serious than those in the Rubin report (one Diebold distributor brushed of the Rubin report with a statement about "still working out few kinks in the system.")

Any other ideas?

Gordon25

by a reporter for a large newspaper. We'll see what they say. I think their defense will be that you'd need to get remote access.

Then they said (I'll bet) that there is no Internet access.

We'll soon see.

Bev