posted November 01, 2004 04:33 AM              

---

Purposely Corrupted Diebold
Voting Terminals
By Bev Harris
10-31-4

Manipulation technique found in the Diebold central tabulator --

1,000 of these systems are in place, and they count up to two million votes at a time.

"By entering a 2-digit code in a hidden location, a second set of votes is created. This set of votes can be changed, so that it no longer matches the correct votes" !!!

The voting system will then read the totals from the bogus vote set. It takes only seconds to change the votes, and to date not a single location in the U.S. has implemented security measures to fully mitigate the risks.

This program is not "stupidity" or sloppiness.

It was designed and tested over a series of a dozen version adjustments.

Public officials: If you are in a county that uses GEMS 1.18.18, GEMS 1.18.19, or GEMS 1.18.23, your secretary or state may not have told you about this. You're the one who'll be blamed if your election is tampered with. Find out for yourself if you have this problem: Black Box Voting will be happy to walk you through a diagnostic procedure over the phone.

Whether you vote absentee, on touch-screens, or on paper ballot (fill in the bubble) optical scan machines, all votes are ultimately brought to the "mother ship," the central tabulator at the county which adds them all up and creates the results report.

These systems are used in over 30 states and each counts up to two million votes at once.

The central tabulator is far more vulnerable than the touch screen terminals.

Think about it: If you were going to tamper with an election, would you rather tamper with 4,500 individual voting machines, or with just one machine, the central tabulator which receives votes from all the machines? Of course, the central tabulator is the most desirable target. Findings:

The GEMS central tabulator program is incorrectly designed and highly vulnerable to fraud. Election results can be changed in a matter of seconds. Part of the program we examined appears to be designed with election tampering in mind.

We have also learned that election officials maintain inadequate controls over access to the central tabulator. We need to beef up procedures to mitigate risks.

Much of this information, originally published on July 8, 2003, has since been corroborated by formal studies (RABA) and by Diebold's own internal memos written by its programmers.

Not a single location has yet implemented the security measures needed to mitigate the risk. Yet, it is not too late. We need to tackle this one, folks, roll up our sleeves, and implement corrective measures.

In Nov. 2003, Black Box Voting founder Bev Harris, and director Jim March, filed a Qui Tam lawsuit in California citing fraudulent claims by Diebold, seeking restitution for the taxpayer. Diebold claimed its voting system was secure. It is, in fact, highly vulnerable to and appears to be designed for fraud.

The California Attorney General was made aware of this problem nearly a year ago. Harris and Black Box Voting Associate Director Andy Stephenson visited the Washington Attorney General's office in Feb. 2004 to inform them of the problem.

Yet, nothing has been done to inform election officials who are using the system, nor have appropriate security safeguards been implemented.

In fact, Gov. Swarzenegger recently froze the funds, allocated by Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, which would have paid for increased scrutiny of the voting system in California.

On April 21, 2004, Harris appeared before the California Voting Systems Panel, and presented the smoking gun document showing that Diebold had not corrected the GEMS flaws, even though it had updated and upgraded the GEMS program.

On Aug. 8, 2004, Harris demonstrated to Howard Dean how easy it is to change votes in GEMS, on CNBC TV.

On Aug. 11, 2004, Jim March formally requested that the Calfornia Voting Systems Panel watch the demonstration of the double set of books in GEMS. They were already convened, and the time for Harris was already allotted. Though the demonstration takes only 3 minutes, the panel refused to allow it and would not look. They did, however, meet privately with Diebold afterwards, without informing the public or issuing any report of what transpired.

On Aug. 18, 2004, Harris and Stephenson, together with computer security expert Dr. Hugh Thompson, and former King County Elections Supervisor Julie Anne Kempf, met with members of the California Voting Systems Panel and the California Secretary of State's office to demonstrate the double set of books. The officials declined to allow a camera crew from 60 Minutes to film or attend.

The Secretary of State's office halted the meeting, called in the general counsel for their office, and a defense attorney from the California Attorney General's office. They refused to allow Black Box Voting to videotape its own demonstration. They prohibited any audiotape and specified that no notes of the meeting could be requested in public records requests.

The undersecretary of state, Mark Kyle, left the meeting early, and one voting panel member, John Mott Smith, appeared to sleep through the presentation.

On Aug. 23, 2004, CBC TV came to California and filmed the demonstration.

Diebold has known of the problem, or should have known, because it did a cease and desist on the web site when Harris originally reported the problem in 2003. On Aug. 11, 2004, Harris also offered to show the problem to Marvin Singleton, Diebold's damage control expert, and to other Diebold execs. They refused to look.

Why don't people want to look? Suppose you are formally informed that the gas tank tends to explode on the car you are telling people to use. If you KNOW about it, but do nothing, you are liable.

LET US HOLD DIEBOLD, AND OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, ACCOUNTABLE.

1) Let there be no one who can say "I didn't know."

2) Let there be no election jurisdiction using GEMS that fails to implement all of the proper corrective procedures, to mitigate risk.

Copyright © 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/?q=node/view/78

IP: Logged

posted November 01, 2004 04:51 AM              

---

This is scarey!

http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=100&mode=&order=0&thold=0

IP: Logged

posted November 01, 2004 11:52 AM              

---

I already voted......and on a paper ballot....hope this makes my vote safer...

...and you'll never guess who I voted for...

LOve,
Rainbow

IP: Logged

posted November 01, 2004 12:16 PM              

---

Mrs. Procrastination here didn't get her permanent absentee ballot registration in on time... so, off to the voting booth I go tomorrow. I'm not sure what kind of voting machines we're going to be using. Since I live so close to Portland, I know all about their stuff, and very little about my own

Next time I will be voting absentee though.

IP: Logged

posted November 01, 2004 11:48 PM              

---

Yeah Rainbow, the corruption of the Diebold Corp.'s machines has been news for awhile- amazing how the "media" ignored it.

IP: Logged

posted November 02, 2004 12:01 AM              

---

Libra....MK.....

Here's some info from that link I posted....

"Diebold Election Systems, based in the key battleground state of Ohio, is headed by Chairman and CEO Walden O’Dell, a George W. Bush pioneer, raising more than $100,000 for Dubya’s election war chest."

So how do ya like those apples???? *sigh*

Love,
Rainbow

IP: Logged

posted November 02, 2004 01:29 AM              

---

We don't have to worry about those Diebold machines in Michigan, Rainbow. The Secretary of State in Michigan banned them from this election because they didn't provide a paper trail.

But we do have different voting machines in different precincts which I think is weird. I guess it depends on the city government which ones they choose. I think the whole country should have the same voting systems. And definitely not Diebold. That company from Texas even came out and publically said they were doing their best to get George W. Bush elected again. Which is a misstatement since he was never elected in the first place.

IP: Logged

posted November 02, 2004 02:33 AM              

---

quote:

---

he was never elected in the first place

---

Ya got that right!

It's scarey to think of those who have to vote on a Diebold voting machine....

Considering the CEO of Diebold is a bush supporter....eeeeeee

Mirandee I already voted...I voted Friday and it was on paper...I feel pretty confident it won't be messed with...*sigh*

Love,
Rainbow

IP: Logged

posted November 11, 2004 11:57 PM              

---

Isn't it interesting that Bush won where those doggone Diebold electronic machines were? Those Republican owned machines???

'course everybody knows that was all just a coincidence...

Sure!

Right!

IP: Logged