DIEBOLD computerized vote-machines ARE STEALING OUR ELECTIONS, and cowardly Senate Dems. DON'T CARE!
UPDATE: Watch the video of Princeton University Information Technology ("IT") labs duplication of a MALICIOUS, VOTE-STEALING HACK of Diebold's current "Accu-Vote TS" machine, including the possibility that a single corrupted machine could be made to infect all other machines via a computer VIRUS, that could be instructed to self-destruct, leaving no trace of its insertion or vote-stealing. (Technical supporting paper also available at this site):
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/videos.html
or at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJOyz7_sk8I
=============================================
Rest assured, when a 'news' story hits AOL 'news', it has been washed, bleached, soaked, tumbled, dried, and corporate-media sanitized to the n'th degree; to arrive at that "You are secure as an Amurikan good-little-consumer-citizen... be very afraid but buy alot of stuff!" mantra that the corporate media so loves to sell us.
SO when AOL posts the AP story "Princeton Professor Hacks Electronic Voting Machines," it is written in a style almost indistinguishable from a review of the latest electronic gadgets at the Vegas electronics showcase, "The Xbox is good, but check out the up-load capabilities of the PS2 system!"
The REAL QUESTION IS, "with the outcome of American democracy riding on an accurate and honest vote count; and with the control of BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS of federal dollars (TAX powers) riding on that vote count.... WHY is it 2006 - and ONLY NOW is the 'major-media' paying attention to the HACKABILITY inherent in Diebold's PROPRIETARY ("privatized") SOFTWARE?
WHY has THE US GOVERNMENT - the courts, the Congress, the executive, and other enforcement agencies - FAILED to PERFORM THE INDEPENDENT, verifiable TESTS, necessary to ASSURE American voters that OUR VOTES ARE BEING COUNTED CORRECTLY and honestly?
WHY do Republicans fondly recall Ronald Reagan's mantra regarding weapons treaties with the Soviet Union, "Trust... BUT VERIFY!", while we American voters in 2006 are supposed to BLINDLY 'trust' that are votes are being counted on privately owned and inspected voting machines... not to mention that there is every reason to suspect that votes have NOT been counted correctly in the past 3 national elections?
Well, the answer to the above, "WHY are we being ROBBED of assurances and verifications we deserve as Americans for our voting process" is simple enough.. the Democratic "OPPOSITION" Party, especially in the senate (with the, oh, TWO-HUNDRED-YEAR-plus tradition of the SENATE FILIBUSTER) - is **AWOL ** or MIA - Missing in Action - at asserting and demanding our voting rights!
HOW have the Democrats arrived at an era where UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS must do the job that THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT **SHOULD** be doing... INDEPENDENTLY running severe and tenacious testing of the accuracy of our electronic voting machines??
Well, the answers are many, both structural, personal, and historical. Historically, America started with limited enfranchisement and outright chattel slavery, severely 'anti-democratic' tendencies from our founding. It was only in the 1920s that women got the right to vote, and it was only in the mid-1960s - while America was fighting a war in Vietnam to "make the world safe for democracy" - that America finally sought to enforce the 15th amendment by passing the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, respectivley. Until that time, the SOUTHERN-STATES FILIBUSTER had effectively CHOCKED OFF enforcement of the 15th amendment. That is, for almost 100 years of US history, the American government IGNORED, FLOUTED, and DID NOT ENFORCE the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, which means that (speaking from a detached frame of reference), not only was CONSTITUTIONAL LAW made subservient to local laws, but one could safely make a prediction that American politics and power would again see a tendency to "backslide" or regress re voting rights enforcement for minorities.... or even, in the early 21st century, for the majority!
A STRUCTURAL element of this "How did we arrive at a juncture where the entire Democrat senate makes NO efforts to uphold the rights of the American voting process" has also taken place over the past 4 decades, since the passions and empowerment of the late 1960s saw the apex of Civil Rights, voting rights, environmental, education, worker safety and job rights, securities and financial regulations, and other legislation of the "liberal" or progressive/democratic agenda enacted into law in the late 1960s and early 1970s. As political scientist observers have noted, ALMOST ALL OF THESE issues and new laws from the '60s and '70s were written AT THE EXPENSE of Big Business, which predictably organized a reaction or backlash to what it saw as crippling regulatory and tax powers. Thus today we have the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), CATO foundation, Coors foundation, Olin foundation, Mellon-Scaife foundations, Moon-owned businesses, and DOZENS of other corporate funded organizations which are almost exclusively devoted to DECREASING TAXES and DECREASING Regulations; i.e. the Republican agenda of TAX CUTS and SECRECY as pushed by the Bush-Rove-Cheney administration.
Today, not only do Democrats SHARE the same big donors as Republicans (when poster-boy of Right-Wing lobbying and moral-values rectitude Rick Santorum goes down to a well-deserved defeat in the November elections, HILLARY CLINTON will take his place as the candidate/incumbent who will be the NUMBER ONE RECIPIENT of big-pharmaceutical campaign donations), but even more insidiously, the Democrats are now ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT DEPENDENT on A.) favorable media coverage; and B.) the Democrats MUST ENRICH THE VERY CORPORATIONS that they (should) be charged with restraining, because to reach voters politicians MUST BUY AIRTIME, which enriches the big media conglomerates!
So, whenever you read "John Kerry raised $100 million for his 2004 presidential campaign!" or "Hillary Clinton has already raised $44 million for her potential presidential campaign" JUST REMEMBER - the LION's SHARE OF THAT MONEY is going DIRECTLY TO THE BIG MEDIA CONGLOMERATES - Disney/abc, GE/nbc, Murdoch/Fox, Viacom, Clear-Channel, Washington Post Group, New York Times group, and a small handful of others - to purchase poltical advertising.
Conglomerates who DETERMINE THE 'news' narrative in America, and will most certainly NOT allow any "news" that is detrimental to their own interests (as they see them) be aired on their networks.
(For example, it will be a cold day in the next ice-age before General Electric co. (GE) allows NBC to do an investigative series on parent company GE's dumping of PCB contaminants into the Hudson River watershed.)
And, finally, just as important as the historical elements and the structural elements comprising the low profile of the current Democratic Party, there are the PERSONALITY elements. All season long the Democratic senators seek to maintain low profiles while searching out TV cameras to appear in front of - in search of the so called "valence issues" that mean little but make a candidate look good on TV, such as "I support the flag!"
You couldn't ask for a better (or more glaring) example of a candidate in search of a "valence issue" than HILLARY CLINTON rushing to sign on as co-sponsor of a bill to CRIMINALIZE flag burning. According to Hillary it is perfectly OK for Confederate Army re-enactors to dream of or act out firing their big guns on Old Glory at Fort Sumter... but break out the handcuffs for any protestor driven to burning an American flag!
You could hardly ask for a better, more glaring example of a senator IGNORING the FRAUDULENT VOTE COUNTING issue than Hillary, with her co-sponsor obsession for arresting, trying, and imprisoning... people who might in the future (because we can't even think of any examples from the past!) be driven to burn the flag in protest or frustration.
Hillary of course is not the only high profile Democrat to suffer from "personality deficiency" - John Kerry PROMISED millions of Democratic voters that he would "FIGHT TO HAVE OUR VOTES COUNTED," but not only did Kerry stand there like a box-of-rocks in the 3rd presidential debate while Pres. Bush sneered into national TV cameras "My opponent is a FLIP-FLOPPER!", but Kerry was in SUCH A RUSH TO CONCEDE the election on election night, that he was forced to wait until the next morning to concede, because President Bush had already gone to sleep!
Personal shortcomings, structural failures, historical tendencies, and the DIEBOLDIZATION of the voting process - the Democratic Party these 8 weeks out from election 2006 is in a mess, and if by some miracle American voters do turn out in sufficient numbers to vote for a RESTRAINING influence on the Bush-Rove-Cheney monopoly over US government,many of the Democrats in the Senate who least deserve it will be the first ones to reap the power of such a voter committment.
--------------------------------------------------------------
<< A Princeton University computer science professor added new fuel Wednesday to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country ARE VULNERABLE TO HACKING that COULD ALTER VOTE TOTALS OR DISABLE MACHINES.
In a paper posted on the university's Web site, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines. >>
<< The researchers say THEY DESIGNED SOFTWARE CAPABLE OF MODIFYING ALL RECORDS, AUDIT LOGS, and COUNTERS kept by the voting machine, ENSURING that a careful FORENSIC EXAMINATION ***WOULD FIND NOTHING WRONG.****
The programs were able to modify vote totals or cause machines to break down, something that could alter the course of an election if machines were located in crucial polling stations.
It was ALSO POSSIBLE to DESIGN A COMPUTER VIRUS to SPREAD MALICIOUS PROGRAMS to multiple [other] MACHINES by piggybacking on a new software download or an election information file being transferred from machine to machine, Felten said. >>
---------------------------------------------------------
<< The MARKETING DIRECTOR for the machine's maker - Diebold Inc.'s Diebold Election Systems of Allen, Texas - blasted the report, saying Felten ignored newer software and security measures that prevent such hacking. >>
---------------------------------------
Black-comedy laugh-out-loud: the Princeton U. "hacker's test" DOESN'T EVEN RATE a Diebold VP, but only a response by.... the MARKETING DIRECTOR ???
(Note: Is there ANYONE in America who would ACCEPT THIS LEVEL of security for their financial protfolios, "Diebold's marketing Director Mark Radke said that newer software and security measures had been placed on the machines" - BUT DON'T RUN A NATIONAL TEST or INVESTIGATION of the security of those computers, and anyone who wants verifiable paper trails must be godless communists!)
This black-comedy FARCE brought to America by the systematically AWOL 'Democrats' in the US Senate!
===========================================
Princeton Professor Hacks Electronic Voting Machine
By CHRIS NEWMARKER, AP
14 Sept. 2006
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/princeton-professor-hacks-electronic/20060913233009990001?_ccc=4&cid=842
photo- Steve Nesius, AP
A Diebold Election Systems electronic voting machine is tested in Jackson, Miss. in June.
TRENTON, N.J. (Sept. 14) - A Princeton University computer science professor added new fuel Wednesday to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country are vulnerable to hacking that could alter vote totals or disable machines.
In a paper posted on the university's Web site, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines.
The marketing director for the machine's maker - Diebold Inc.'s Diebold Election Systems of Allen, Texas - blasted the report, saying Felten ignored newer software and security measures that prevent such hacking.
"I'm concerned by the fact we weren't contacted to educate these people on where our current technology stands," Mark Radke said.
Radke also question why Felten hadn't submitted his paper for peer review, as is commonly done before publishing scientific research.
Felten said he and his colleagues felt it necessary to publish the paper as quickly as possible because of the possible implications for the November midterm elections.
About 80 percent of American voters are expected to use some form of electronic voting in the upcoming election, in which the makeup of the U.S. House will be decided, as well as 33 Senate seats and 36 governorships.
The AccuVote-TS is commonly used across the country, along with a newer model, the AccuVote-TSx. While Felten wasn't able to test the new machine, he said he thought much of what he found would still apply.
The machine Felten tested, obtained in May from an undisclosed source, was the same type used across Maryland in its primary election Tuesday, according to Ross Goldstein, a deputy administrator with the state's Board of Elections. Goldstein said he couldn't comment on the report until he read it.
Diebold and other machine manufacturers, including California-based Sequoia Voting Systems Inc. and Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software Inc., have been the subject of lawsuits, claiming the machines are vulnerable to hacking and breakdowns that can assign votes to the wrong candidate.
Election officials in some states have also complained.
Previous studies have claimed hacking vulnerabilities with the machines. But Felten claims his study is the first time that an independent research group has obtained an actual machine and tested it extensively.
Felten and graduate students Ariel Feldman and Alex Halderman found that malicious programs could be placed on the Diebold by accessing the memory card slot and power button, both behind a locked door on the side of the machine. One member of the group was able to pick the lock in 10 seconds, and software could be installed in less than a minute, according to the report.
The researchers say they designed software capable of modifying all records, audit logs and counters kept by the voting machine, ensuring that a careful forensic examination would find nothing wrong.
The programs were able to modify vote totals or cause machines to break down, something that could alter the course of an election if machines were located in crucial polling stations.
It was also possible to design a computer virus to spread malicious programs to multiple machines by piggybacking on a new software download or an election information file being transferred from machine to machine, Felten said.
"I think there are many people out there who have the type of technical ability to carry out the sort of attacks we describe here," he said.
Felten said hacking dangers could be mitigated with better software, more restrictions on access to machines and memory cards, and paper receipts verified by the voter.
Radke said Diebold already has implemented many of those things.
09-14-06 02:08 EDT
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/videos.html
or at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJOyz7_sk8I
=============================================
Rest assured, when a 'news' story hits AOL 'news', it has been washed, bleached, soaked, tumbled, dried, and corporate-media sanitized to the n'th degree; to arrive at that "You are secure as an Amurikan good-little-consumer-citizen... be very afraid but buy alot of stuff!" mantra that the corporate media so loves to sell us.
SO when AOL posts the AP story "Princeton Professor Hacks Electronic Voting Machines," it is written in a style almost indistinguishable from a review of the latest electronic gadgets at the Vegas electronics showcase, "The Xbox is good, but check out the up-load capabilities of the PS2 system!"
The REAL QUESTION IS, "with the outcome of American democracy riding on an accurate and honest vote count; and with the control of BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS of federal dollars (TAX powers) riding on that vote count.... WHY is it 2006 - and ONLY NOW is the 'major-media' paying attention to the HACKABILITY inherent in Diebold's PROPRIETARY ("privatized") SOFTWARE?
WHY has THE US GOVERNMENT - the courts, the Congress, the executive, and other enforcement agencies - FAILED to PERFORM THE INDEPENDENT, verifiable TESTS, necessary to ASSURE American voters that OUR VOTES ARE BEING COUNTED CORRECTLY and honestly?
WHY do Republicans fondly recall Ronald Reagan's mantra regarding weapons treaties with the Soviet Union, "Trust... BUT VERIFY!", while we American voters in 2006 are supposed to BLINDLY 'trust' that are votes are being counted on privately owned and inspected voting machines... not to mention that there is every reason to suspect that votes have NOT been counted correctly in the past 3 national elections?
Well, the answer to the above, "WHY are we being ROBBED of assurances and verifications we deserve as Americans for our voting process" is simple enough.. the Democratic "OPPOSITION" Party, especially in the senate (with the, oh, TWO-HUNDRED-YEAR-plus tradition of the SENATE FILIBUSTER) - is **AWOL ** or MIA - Missing in Action - at asserting and demanding our voting rights!
HOW have the Democrats arrived at an era where UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS must do the job that THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT **SHOULD** be doing... INDEPENDENTLY running severe and tenacious testing of the accuracy of our electronic voting machines??
Well, the answers are many, both structural, personal, and historical. Historically, America started with limited enfranchisement and outright chattel slavery, severely 'anti-democratic' tendencies from our founding. It was only in the 1920s that women got the right to vote, and it was only in the mid-1960s - while America was fighting a war in Vietnam to "make the world safe for democracy" - that America finally sought to enforce the 15th amendment by passing the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, respectivley. Until that time, the SOUTHERN-STATES FILIBUSTER had effectively CHOCKED OFF enforcement of the 15th amendment. That is, for almost 100 years of US history, the American government IGNORED, FLOUTED, and DID NOT ENFORCE the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, which means that (speaking from a detached frame of reference), not only was CONSTITUTIONAL LAW made subservient to local laws, but one could safely make a prediction that American politics and power would again see a tendency to "backslide" or regress re voting rights enforcement for minorities.... or even, in the early 21st century, for the majority!
A STRUCTURAL element of this "How did we arrive at a juncture where the entire Democrat senate makes NO efforts to uphold the rights of the American voting process" has also taken place over the past 4 decades, since the passions and empowerment of the late 1960s saw the apex of Civil Rights, voting rights, environmental, education, worker safety and job rights, securities and financial regulations, and other legislation of the "liberal" or progressive/democratic agenda enacted into law in the late 1960s and early 1970s. As political scientist observers have noted, ALMOST ALL OF THESE issues and new laws from the '60s and '70s were written AT THE EXPENSE of Big Business, which predictably organized a reaction or backlash to what it saw as crippling regulatory and tax powers. Thus today we have the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), CATO foundation, Coors foundation, Olin foundation, Mellon-Scaife foundations, Moon-owned businesses, and DOZENS of other corporate funded organizations which are almost exclusively devoted to DECREASING TAXES and DECREASING Regulations; i.e. the Republican agenda of TAX CUTS and SECRECY as pushed by the Bush-Rove-Cheney administration.
Today, not only do Democrats SHARE the same big donors as Republicans (when poster-boy of Right-Wing lobbying and moral-values rectitude Rick Santorum goes down to a well-deserved defeat in the November elections, HILLARY CLINTON will take his place as the candidate/incumbent who will be the NUMBER ONE RECIPIENT of big-pharmaceutical campaign donations), but even more insidiously, the Democrats are now ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT DEPENDENT on A.) favorable media coverage; and B.) the Democrats MUST ENRICH THE VERY CORPORATIONS that they (should) be charged with restraining, because to reach voters politicians MUST BUY AIRTIME, which enriches the big media conglomerates!
So, whenever you read "John Kerry raised $100 million for his 2004 presidential campaign!" or "Hillary Clinton has already raised $44 million for her potential presidential campaign" JUST REMEMBER - the LION's SHARE OF THAT MONEY is going DIRECTLY TO THE BIG MEDIA CONGLOMERATES - Disney/abc, GE/nbc, Murdoch/Fox, Viacom, Clear-Channel, Washington Post Group, New York Times group, and a small handful of others - to purchase poltical advertising.
Conglomerates who DETERMINE THE 'news' narrative in America, and will most certainly NOT allow any "news" that is detrimental to their own interests (as they see them) be aired on their networks.
(For example, it will be a cold day in the next ice-age before General Electric co. (GE) allows NBC to do an investigative series on parent company GE's dumping of PCB contaminants into the Hudson River watershed.)
And, finally, just as important as the historical elements and the structural elements comprising the low profile of the current Democratic Party, there are the PERSONALITY elements. All season long the Democratic senators seek to maintain low profiles while searching out TV cameras to appear in front of - in search of the so called "valence issues" that mean little but make a candidate look good on TV, such as "I support the flag!"
You couldn't ask for a better (or more glaring) example of a candidate in search of a "valence issue" than HILLARY CLINTON rushing to sign on as co-sponsor of a bill to CRIMINALIZE flag burning. According to Hillary it is perfectly OK for Confederate Army re-enactors to dream of or act out firing their big guns on Old Glory at Fort Sumter... but break out the handcuffs for any protestor driven to burning an American flag!
You could hardly ask for a better, more glaring example of a senator IGNORING the FRAUDULENT VOTE COUNTING issue than Hillary, with her co-sponsor obsession for arresting, trying, and imprisoning... people who might in the future (because we can't even think of any examples from the past!) be driven to burn the flag in protest or frustration.
Hillary of course is not the only high profile Democrat to suffer from "personality deficiency" - John Kerry PROMISED millions of Democratic voters that he would "FIGHT TO HAVE OUR VOTES COUNTED," but not only did Kerry stand there like a box-of-rocks in the 3rd presidential debate while Pres. Bush sneered into national TV cameras "My opponent is a FLIP-FLOPPER!", but Kerry was in SUCH A RUSH TO CONCEDE the election on election night, that he was forced to wait until the next morning to concede, because President Bush had already gone to sleep!
Personal shortcomings, structural failures, historical tendencies, and the DIEBOLDIZATION of the voting process - the Democratic Party these 8 weeks out from election 2006 is in a mess, and if by some miracle American voters do turn out in sufficient numbers to vote for a RESTRAINING influence on the Bush-Rove-Cheney monopoly over US government,many of the Democrats in the Senate who least deserve it will be the first ones to reap the power of such a voter committment.
--------------------------------------------------------------
<< A Princeton University computer science professor added new fuel Wednesday to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country ARE VULNERABLE TO HACKING that COULD ALTER VOTE TOTALS OR DISABLE MACHINES.
In a paper posted on the university's Web site, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines. >>
<< The researchers say THEY DESIGNED SOFTWARE CAPABLE OF MODIFYING ALL RECORDS, AUDIT LOGS, and COUNTERS kept by the voting machine, ENSURING that a careful FORENSIC EXAMINATION ***WOULD FIND NOTHING WRONG.****
The programs were able to modify vote totals or cause machines to break down, something that could alter the course of an election if machines were located in crucial polling stations.
It was ALSO POSSIBLE to DESIGN A COMPUTER VIRUS to SPREAD MALICIOUS PROGRAMS to multiple [other] MACHINES by piggybacking on a new software download or an election information file being transferred from machine to machine, Felten said. >>
---------------------------------------------------------
<< The MARKETING DIRECTOR for the machine's maker - Diebold Inc.'s Diebold Election Systems of Allen, Texas - blasted the report, saying Felten ignored newer software and security measures that prevent such hacking. >>
---------------------------------------
Black-comedy laugh-out-loud: the Princeton U. "hacker's test" DOESN'T EVEN RATE a Diebold VP, but only a response by.... the MARKETING DIRECTOR ???
(Note: Is there ANYONE in America who would ACCEPT THIS LEVEL of security for their financial protfolios, "Diebold's marketing Director Mark Radke said that newer software and security measures had been placed on the machines" - BUT DON'T RUN A NATIONAL TEST or INVESTIGATION of the security of those computers, and anyone who wants verifiable paper trails must be godless communists!)
This black-comedy FARCE brought to America by the systematically AWOL 'Democrats' in the US Senate!
===========================================
Princeton Professor Hacks Electronic Voting Machine
By CHRIS NEWMARKER, AP
14 Sept. 2006
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/princeton-professor-hacks-electronic/20060913233009990001?_ccc=4&cid=842
photo- Steve Nesius, AP
A Diebold Election Systems electronic voting machine is tested in Jackson, Miss. in June.
TRENTON, N.J. (Sept. 14) - A Princeton University computer science professor added new fuel Wednesday to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country are vulnerable to hacking that could alter vote totals or disable machines.
In a paper posted on the university's Web site, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines.
The marketing director for the machine's maker - Diebold Inc.'s Diebold Election Systems of Allen, Texas - blasted the report, saying Felten ignored newer software and security measures that prevent such hacking.
"I'm concerned by the fact we weren't contacted to educate these people on where our current technology stands," Mark Radke said.
Radke also question why Felten hadn't submitted his paper for peer review, as is commonly done before publishing scientific research.
Felten said he and his colleagues felt it necessary to publish the paper as quickly as possible because of the possible implications for the November midterm elections.
About 80 percent of American voters are expected to use some form of electronic voting in the upcoming election, in which the makeup of the U.S. House will be decided, as well as 33 Senate seats and 36 governorships.
The AccuVote-TS is commonly used across the country, along with a newer model, the AccuVote-TSx. While Felten wasn't able to test the new machine, he said he thought much of what he found would still apply.
The machine Felten tested, obtained in May from an undisclosed source, was the same type used across Maryland in its primary election Tuesday, according to Ross Goldstein, a deputy administrator with the state's Board of Elections. Goldstein said he couldn't comment on the report until he read it.
Diebold and other machine manufacturers, including California-based Sequoia Voting Systems Inc. and Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software Inc., have been the subject of lawsuits, claiming the machines are vulnerable to hacking and breakdowns that can assign votes to the wrong candidate.
Election officials in some states have also complained.
Previous studies have claimed hacking vulnerabilities with the machines. But Felten claims his study is the first time that an independent research group has obtained an actual machine and tested it extensively.
Felten and graduate students Ariel Feldman and Alex Halderman found that malicious programs could be placed on the Diebold by accessing the memory card slot and power button, both behind a locked door on the side of the machine. One member of the group was able to pick the lock in 10 seconds, and software could be installed in less than a minute, according to the report.
The researchers say they designed software capable of modifying all records, audit logs and counters kept by the voting machine, ensuring that a careful forensic examination would find nothing wrong.
The programs were able to modify vote totals or cause machines to break down, something that could alter the course of an election if machines were located in crucial polling stations.
It was also possible to design a computer virus to spread malicious programs to multiple machines by piggybacking on a new software download or an election information file being transferred from machine to machine, Felten said.
"I think there are many people out there who have the type of technical ability to carry out the sort of attacks we describe here," he said.
Felten said hacking dangers could be mitigated with better software, more restrictions on access to machines and memory cards, and paper receipts verified by the voter.
Radke said Diebold already has implemented many of those things.
09-14-06 02:08 EDT
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
posted by verifi at 8:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home