"hotel mini bar key" opens Diebold Voting Machines

cy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
8,186
Location
USA
"hotel mini bar key" opens Diebold Voting Machines

"The access panel door on a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine — the door that protects the memory card that stores the votes, and is the main barrier to the injection of a virus — can be opened with a standard key that is widely available on the Internet."

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1064
 

Pumaman

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,008
Location
TN
these faulty machines are a huge threat to our democracy. this should be a non-partisan issue.

thanks Cy for bringing this to our attention
 

nerdgineer

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
2,778
Location
Southern California
So that means.....I can use a Diebold key to open my hotel Minibar?...:laughing:

Seriously, I thought the "hanging chads" issue was blown completely out of proportion. The old IBM card paper punch voting machines were reliable, inexpensive, mature, and very secure. They were trashed for an expensive piece of c**p.

What idiots we've allowed our voting officials to make of us...
 

REparsed

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 10, 2006
Messages
154
Location
Ohio
Where can we get those keys in bulk? I'd like to pass them out at the polls…
 

powernoodle

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
2,512
Location
secret underground bunker
No human endeavor is failsafe, but our voting system comes close. The article could have just as easily said that voter machine fraud is statistically non-existent, but thats not quite as titillating.

peace
 

Rudi

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
780
Location
No.Cal.
Thanks for that link Cy. I've been following this issue for years, and that's another interesting detail. Whether or not there is fraud in our elections, think about this: elections are often won or lost by a few percent, or even just a fraction of a percent, while the number of votes that end up not being counted for one reason or another has been reported at 10% nationwide. Even discounting fraud after the ballots are cast, there is no assurance that who gets the most votes is the candidate chosen by most voters.
 

cy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
8,186
Location
USA
PN, sure wish I could agree with your statement. here's another study by Princeton university..

cy said:
Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine

"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."

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

http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ts-paper.pdf


powernoodle said:
No human endeavor is failsafe, but our voting system comes close. The article could have just as easily said that voter machine fraud is statistically non-existent, but thats not quite as titillating.

peace
 

powernoodle

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
2,512
Location
secret underground bunker
Cy -

Its not the theory of potential abuse that I don't accept. Y2K, global cooling/warming, and HIV running unabated through the heterosexual population all were good theories. Its the overwhelming paucity of evidence of ballot box fraud over the last 200 years - paper or electronic - that places this pretty low on my long list of things to worry about. And boy, do I like to worry about stuff. :)

peace
 

cy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
8,186
Location
USA
PN, the fact that no paper trail exists. combined with fact of ease of tampering with perhaps the most common electronic voting machine in US.

it'd be a stretch to believe this has not been taken advantage of. these machines undermines the core of our country. anyone that cares should take the time to read results of Princeton study.

this is not some crackpot group, but a bonified university loaded with PHD's describing how Diebold machines could be easily hacked without leaving a trace.

this is not a right or left issue, but an american one. We have the right to know who we elected is actually the correct one. with Diebold electronic voting machines in charge. it apears this is not possible.
 

turbodog

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
6,425
Location
central time
A few random thoughts:

1. Do you think it really matters who is elected? Each side is equally trashy and a reflection of the society that tolerates them.

2. If this is possible w/o screwing up the tampering (ala "officespace" style) don't you think that each side would equally tamper and thus cancel each other's actions.

3. There are far greater threats to this nation that a little potential, unproved voting fraud. There are threats upon which you and I can exert much more leverage.

Go watch the movie 'bulworth'. Watch the segment on him talking about corporations and interviews.

Hey PN, got room in that bunker for me?
 

Biker Bear

Enlightened
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
279
Location
The Greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Sprawl
Pumaman said:
these faulty machines are a huge threat to our democracy. this should be a non-partisan issue.
Absolutely.

As others have said - in a close election, we're already getting into the margin of error of our election processes; making it worse with these hideously ill-considered machines is just idiotic.

In my opinion, voting machines should be made to a specification published by the government or some kind of neutral panel; they should be made by a variety of companies to that spec, and be absolutely interchangeable no matter the vendor. The software should be OPEN SOURCE, written by a group completely unassociated with the vendors of the hardware. Part of the spec for the hardware should require dual paper receipts - the voter verifies that they match before leaving the voting booth, then one is given to the election officials against any electronic glitch and the voter keeps the other copy.

Even if you don't believe there's already been significant voter fraud - these Diebold monstrosities would make it easy to do on a mind-boggling scale.
 

turbodog

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
6,425
Location
central time
And the most important and overlooked fault of the voting process is.....

thinking that we need computerized voting machines in the first place.

But like i said, it doesn't matter anyway.



Biker Bear said:
Absolutely.

As others have said - in a close election, we're already getting into the margin of error of our election processes; making it worse with these hideously ill-considered machines is just idiotic.

In my opinion, voting machines should be made to a specification published by the government or some kind of neutral panel; they should be made by a variety of companies to that spec, and be absolutely interchangeable no matter the vendor. The software should be OPEN SOURCE, written by a group completely unassociated with the vendors of the hardware. Part of the spec for the hardware should require dual paper receipts - the voter verifies that they match before leaving the voting booth, then one is given to the election officials against any electronic glitch and the voter keeps the other copy.

Even if you don't believe there's already been significant voter fraud - these Diebold monstrosities would make it easy to do on a mind-boggling scale.
 

cy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
8,186
Location
USA
1. absolutely it matters that the correct vote of the people be carried out. to do otherwise would undermine core of what makes America great. again this is not a right or left issue, but an American one.

2. this is not a matter of which side is tampering and coming out ahead. It catagorically should not be possible to change results of the will of the people. With Diebold voting machines, not only is it proven possible. it's coming out it's quite easily accessible.

3. totally disagree with your tone that this is a "little issue" of tampering with our votes. if you have not already done so, please consider actually reading the Princeton report. flat amazing how easy it is to tamper with results of election on Diebolt voting machines without a trace. the princeton papers are not from a movie or results of a bunch of crackpots, but results from a bonified institution.

turbodog said:
A few random thoughts:

1. Do you think it really matters who is elected? Each side is equally trashy and a reflection of the society that tolerates them.

2. If this is possible w/o screwing up the tampering (ala "officespace" style) don't you think that each side would equally tamper and thus cancel each other's actions.

3. There are far greater threats to this nation that a little potential, unproved voting fraud. There are threats upon which you and I can exert much more leverage.

Go watch the movie 'bulworth'. Watch the segment on him talking about corporations and interviews.

Hey PN, got room in that bunker for me?
 
Last edited:

DonShock

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
1,641
Location
Belton Texas
Any voting method is vulnerable to tampering if the elections officials who control the process are dishonest. On the old lever machines, the counters could be reset or not reset as needed to change the results. On the optical systems, unmarked ballots could be marked or marked ballots could be marked further to force their rejection due to "over-voting". And we all saw what a mess could be made of the punch cards. It is impossible to create a perfect method.

In a way, I think the electronics may be a little less vulnerable to "casual" vote fraud due to the specialized programming knowledge needed. There is a smaller pool of individuals who have the capabilities so there is less chance of there being dishonest individuals among them. In addition, the more involved process of needing to write the virus ahead of time, get access to the machines to install it, and finally restore the machine to normal so the fraud is not detected and the votes thrown out raises the chances that anyone trying it would be caught. Fraud on the older methods could be carried out by almost any individual, on the spot, and relatively little chance of being detected after the fact.

Personally, I think all the money spent on these new machines is a waste and was an over-reaction. The supposed systemic problem of vote fraud was an invention of people trying to affect the outcome of an election with little evidence. When there is real singificant vote fraud, there will be evidence. Some of the past isolated incidents that come to mind are precincts with more votes cast than registered voters, "dead" voters, absentee ballots mailed out that were already marked, etc. In all these cases, they should be fully investigated, the affected votes nullified, the individuals involved thrown in jail, and if necessary hold another vote with increased supervision.

However, if politicians insist that we spend money on these new systems, I do think the idea of a printed reciept is a good one. Not that it would prevent fraud, somebody will always come up with a way, but because it will make the individual voter more confidant in his own vote. But some will still suspect a rigged system any time they lose an election.
 

turbodog

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
6,425
Location
central time
You completely missed the forest for the trees.

Not that it matters, nor do I care anymore.



cy said:
1. absolutely it matters that the correct vote of the people be carried out. to do otherwise would undermine core of what makes America great. again this is not a right or left issue, but an American one.

2. this is not a matter of which side is tampering and coming out ahead. It catagorically should not be possible to change results of the will of the people. With Diebold voting machines, not only is it proven possible. it's coming out it's quite easily accessible.

3. totally disagree with your tone that this is a "little issue" of tampering with our votes. if you have not already done so, please consider actually reading the Princeton report. flat amazing how easy it is to tamper with results of election on Diebolt voting machines without a trace. the princeton papers are not from a movie or results of a bunch of crackpots, but results from a bonified institution.
 

powernoodle

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
2,512
Location
secret underground bunker
It matters a great deal who we elect. In the last presidential election, the candidates differed on Iraq, the nature of the threat and our response, taxes, constitutional interpretation, school vouchers, God, abortion and perhaps most important, the direction of the Supreme Court. While they do having common failings (the southern border, for example), their differences are pronounced and meaningful.

Edited to add:

cy said:
flat amazing how easy it is to tamper with results of election on Diebolt voting machines

Its only easy if a bad person is granted unfettered access to a Diebolt machine, which is equally true if a bad person is granted unfettered access to a container of paper ballots. In fact, it would appear much easier for the average person with no programing or electronics skills to tamper with the latter. I don't dispute that either could occur - I just dispute the likelihood of it occurring and the likelihood of it affecting the outcome of an election. As someone who has worked in polling places, I can tell you there are usually about 8 eyeballs (4 dems and 4 repubs) watching those things like hawks from start to finish.


peace
 
Last edited:

nerdgineer

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
2,778
Location
Southern California
powernoodle said:
...In fact, it would appear much easier for the average person with no programing or electronics skills to tamper with the latter [paper ballots]...
Yes, but it would take a lot more TIME to tamper singificantly with paper ballots than it would to tamper with an insecure electronic voting machine.
 

Rudi

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
780
Location
No.Cal.
There are numerous reliable reports about voting machines in general (not only Diebold) being vulnerable to tampering -- in one minute flat, guaranteed undetectable.

The Princeton report didn't attempt to single out Diebold machines. They were looking for any make of voting machine and happened to get their hands on a Diebold.

Food for thought: If the technology is widely available to make such machines reliable and tamper-proof and paper-trailable, then how come there is no will to implement these basic features?

A conspiracy buff could be forgiven for surmising that the party in power finds it convenient to have insecure machines, and that the alleged 'opposition' party doesn't protest too loudly because eventually they will be in power and look forward to the same advantages.

The aknowleged authority on this subject is Bev Harris who has been travelling extensively for years giving lectures and demonstrations on the subject. Check out her book Black Box Voting: Ballot-Tampering in the 21st century.
 
Top