BBV: MIT snared in dispute over voting machines

apologies if this is a dupe...

Firm: Students posted stolen Diebold files
By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 10/30/2003

Two students have embroiled the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in a nationwide controversy about the reliability of a company's high-tech voting machines.

Diebold Inc., of North Canton, Ohio, on Tuesday sent letters to MIT demanding that the school cut off Internet access to data files posted by C. Scott Ananian, a graduate student in computer science, and sophomore mathematics student David Meyer. The files, thousands of pages of Diebold internal documents, were stolen in March when someone broke into the Diebold computer network. They have been widely distributed on the Internet by political activists, who say the documents reveal serious flaws in Diebold's line of computerized voting machines.

Diebold says the documents are copyrighted and can't be shared. The company has been warning Internet providers and colleges to remove the files from their computers, or possibly face legal action.

A spokesman for MIT said school officials are looking into the matter "and will issue soon an appropriate and legal response."

Meyer said he had already heard from the school, which warned him to take down the Diebold material. "They said if I didn't remove it, they'd suspend my MIT account," he said.

more...

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/10/30/mit_snared_in_dispute_over_voting_machines/

The league of Women Voters has a number of articles which dispute the problems check out http://www.lwv.org/
They usually do a pretty thorough job of research.

but local chapters have supported reform (voter verified paper ballot). Would you place your trust in the machines on faith, or the word of any single organization? I'd prefer to go with science, and have open source coding if I couldn't have a voter verified paper ballot printed. Here is some articles for your reading pleasure:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/09/23/bev_harris/index_np.html

http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/02/20/voting_machines/

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/10/30/vote_counting_software/index_np.html

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/10/15/riverside_voting_machines/index_np.html

http://www.msnbc.com/news/985033.asp#BODY

http://www.leagueissues.org

The proponents of a paper ballot within the LWV are extremely vocal, and as time goes by, some who quietly "watched and read" are becoming vocal, and lining up on our side of the debate.

Just a thought - membership to the LWV is open to the public, and not particularly costly. It you are passionate about this, you may want to join them, if for no other reason than to contribute to the ongoing discussion.

I can't find it.

I'd like to see the LWV's credentials in Computer Science and IT Security. Just because they attempt to debunk this matter doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are plenty of accredited institutions and some of the best IT folks that have reported on these devices as having flaws.

Take a trip over to blackboxvoting.com and download chapters 1-11 of Bev Harris' book, there should be enough proof to make up your mind.

Something has been wrong with them since the 1980s.

, or better, the spokeperson who put that piece of crap on their site without consulting with the local chapters obviously does not know what she is talking about. Just read for a minute a random piece of their arguments. They argue, for instance, that these machines have to be reliable because they are extremely sophisticated! Well, any computer scientist and engineer knows that the more a machine is sophisticated and the more likely it is that one of its components will malfunction; or that interactions between components will not be as planned. I'm serious! Read their one page summary on this. They are at this pathetic level...
Obviously, they have been contacted by some vendors at some point, and have notbothered researching the issue.
-CV

The LWV position on DRE's came from the top down- and this is NOT the way things are done in the League.

Many, many local members are quite upset.

at the universities cannot be downloaded... Try for example the harvard one... It shows up, but it cannot be downloaded... Odd... -C

A trained monkey with access to the computer(terminal or via internet) and a copy of MS Access could pull this hack off. Why won't anyone take this seriously? I am very fearful for the future of "democracy" in this country.

http://www.why-war.com/features/2003/10/diebold.html

And, of course, Diebold's lawyers and the Swarthmore Dean's shameless capitulation, and of course the sacrifices and courage of activists like Bev Harris, Demactivist and Jim March, all of whom have now been banned from this forum.

(edit near miss on the keyboard)

DU is in the conspiracy too... Are you implying that ? :)

"... all of whom have now been banned from this forum."

and the number seems to grow daily.

Diebold uses a wonderful arguement about the memos. They say they are edited, false, changed, etc. but they insist that they are theirs and copyrighted. They need to make up their minds.

The students at all of these Universities are doing a wonderful service for those of us in voting activism.

....by someone who broke into the company's network?

Is that an accurate description? I thought they just were sitting on the net, with no shield and no precautions.

40,000+ with Diebold source code were laying out in the open for about six years before Bev found. Them. If Diebold is claiming they were stolen, Diebold is LYING through its crooked teeth.

The emails were supposedly hacked, though when they were brought to my attention I was told they were from an insider. There are only two possible explanations for the ease by which a lat=rge volume of email was acquired:

1) An insider with access.

2) Pathetic security at Diebold.

Niether one bodes well for the company.

The entire story of the files discovery is covered in Chapter 10.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org

...maybe THEN people will wake up to how easily these machines can be hacked.

(and if not, then certainly President Stallman will make their elimination a top priority).

:evilgrin:

I guess he'd be kind of a GNU-Democrat ;-)

Now there's coffee ALL over my keyboard...

:hi: