Slashdot Mirror

Belgium is having 43% of the population voting using computer (not at home) and magnetic card.
On 18 May 2003 we had a mysterious and spontaneous bit inversion on the vote result ElectronicVotingRandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
This problem was not explain by the code poor quality: AvailableVotingCode
Believe it or not, but maybe by cosmic ray did strike the counting computer during election day: RandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
I have documented and translated a few document in English for internationnal reader, you may want to check ElectronicVoting.
Belgian can get more information in french from VoteElectronique. or PourEva.
Trust me... never trust a computer or a computer expert for election result.

Belgium is having 43% of the population voting using computer (not at home) and magnetic card.
On 18 May 2003 we had a mysterious and spontaneous bit inversion on the vote result ElectronicVotingRandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
This problem was not explain by the code poor quality: AvailableVotingCode
Believe it or not, but maybe by cosmic ray did strike the counting computer during election day: RandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
I have documented and translated a few document in English for internationnal reader, you may want to check ElectronicVoting.
Belgian can get more information in french from VoteElectronique. or PourEva.
Trust me... never trust a computer or a computer expert for election result.

Belgium is having 43% of the population voting using computer (not at home) and magnetic card.
On 18 May 2003 we had a mysterious and spontaneous bit inversion on the vote result ElectronicVotingRandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
This problem was not explain by the code poor quality: AvailableVotingCode
Believe it or not, but maybe by cosmic ray did strike the counting computer during election day: RandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
I have documented and translated a few document in English for internationnal reader, you may want to check ElectronicVoting.
Belgian can get more information in french from VoteElectronique. or PourEva.
Trust me... never trust a computer or a computer expert for election result.

Belgium is having 43% of the population voting using computer (not at home) and magnetic card.
On 18 May 2003 we had a mysterious and spontaneous bit inversion on the vote result ElectronicVotingRandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
This problem was not explain by the code poor quality: AvailableVotingCode
Believe it or not, but maybe by cosmic ray did strike the counting computer during election day: RandomSpontaneousBitInversion.
I have documented and translated a few document in English for internationnal reader, you may want to check ElectronicVoting.
Belgian can get more information in french from VoteElectronique. or PourEva.
Trust me... never trust a computer or a computer expert for election result.

It doesn't help that there's been very few people fighting this from the beginning. Check the EUCD status page. Of the groups listed there, most didn't exist five years ago. Now we are teaming up, making sure we won't be late next time. (The directive was passed spring 2001, no protests)

I believe these organizations are going to make a real difference in the coming years. If you live in Europe, contact the nearest, especially if you are eastern european (We need contacts in the soon-to-be-EU countries)

the DMCA has no teeth in Austria where these guys seem to live

The european version of the DMCA, the EUCD came into force in Austria on July 1st. (I even think the directive could be used against them before that, though it hasn't been transcribed into austrian law). The mailing list message was sent on July 4th. (quite symbolically...)

On the other hand, the picture's pretty murky anyway. The EUCD doesn't change the status for computer programs, and that's what we're really talking about here. It's also important that this exploit has several effects. It may be used for playing pirated games, (nono) but it is also a tool for using the X-box for quite legitimate purposes, like building a home media system etc. Also, the exploit is not done on the programs themselves, but on the platform. Then there is the issue of changing the font files. I don't quite get whether they used changed MS font files or rolled their own. If they use changed MS files, MS might be able to go after them on their "artistic rights".

I recommend finding an austrian lawyer. (And a sympathetic judge...)

Denmark was the first country to adopt the EUCD (DMCA++). Here's a good EUCD status page. It has the same broad anti-circumvention tool proscriptions as the DMCA.

As far as I know, only two or three EU member nations have modified their laws to comply with the EUCD.

Check the EUCD status wiki

Well, Finnish parliament refused to accept the EUCD modified version (modified down btw). You can follow the EUCD status in: here.

Since this hasn't been mentioned yet I'll let people know that Denmark has already implemented the EUCD, which was voted for in December last year. We were the first country to vote as I recall.

I have elaborated on this previously when Finland voted against the EUCD and will be so bold as to link to my previous comment.

Again, for a status of the implementation of the EUCD, check this site.

Support you local interest groups! Thanks for listening.

Sweden - welcome to the party.

But 9 peaples can not verify a lot... and when they make advice to modify the existing system, they are not followed. Here is an analyse of the rapport of year 2000

My mother is not an expert... who should she trust to control the election?

Normal citizen lost control of the election process... it this a democracy?

Check the code for yourself

But having the code is not enough... actually Richard Stallman had something to say about Free Software not being enough.

Now if you are Belgian and unhappy about the status of our election system, you can join or contact PourEVA.

I personally believe that if we want to reduce the repetitive task of counting the ballot, we could use optical scanning (and make test manual recount). But we should never put a computer between our vote and the expression of our vote. Paper and Pen rules.

But having the code is not enough... actually Richard Stallman had something to say about Free Software not being enough.

Now if you are Belgian and unhappy about the status of our election system, you can join or contact PourEVA.

I personally believe that if we want to reduce the repetitive task of counting the ballot, we could use optical scanning (and make test manual recount). But we should never put a computer between our vote and the expression of our vote. Paper and Pen rules.

But having the code is not enough... actually Richard Stallman had something to say about Free Software not being enough.

Now if you are Belgian and unhappy about the status of our election system, you can join or contact PourEVA.

I personally believe that if we want to reduce the repetitive task of counting the ballot, we could use optical scanning (and make test manual recount). But we should never put a computer between our vote and the expression of our vote. Paper and Pen rules.

A paper trail won't stop fraud. In fact, it offers any number of ballot-destruction exploits. Open software and certified, well-tested systems will stop fraud.

Free software is not enough to ensure that elections are carried out properly.

The software used in and for government should always be free software; the government should always have the freedom to run it, study its source code, change it to suit government needs, and distribute copies to others either unchanged or modified. That way, software owners will not have power over the government's computers. But that is not enough to ensure that computerized elections are fair and honest.

It is easy for a programmer to change a program so that it tells the user "You voted for Mr Smith" but actually record a vote for Mr Brown. Unfortunately, free software does not prevent this. There is no known way to prevent this.

With free voting software, a government election committee can study the source code. If the program has been published, anyone can study the source code. But there is no way to be sure that the program actually running when you cast your vote is the same program that you and the election committee studied. Someone could have installed a fiddled version an hour before the election and replaced it with the authorized version an hour after it ended.

To assure honest elections, we need physical ballots that can be used for a recount.

For french speaking, there is a web site telling about the BAD situation in Belgium: http://www.poureva.be/
The source code provided for Belgium is full of missing piece replaced by //Confidentiel/Confidentieel//.
There is no way to make sure this is the code really used durring the election.
Most citizen need to trust expert choosen by the people in power for checking the code and code really in use. Those 9 experts (when they are all comming/selected) don't have the time to check everything and can only analyse what they receive. When they make remarks or have doubt, the thing they propose are not implemented.
I have documented many thing (in french) on http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectronique and a few thing in English (http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/ElectronicVoting)
I have a nice quote from RMS for the peaple that want the program to be Free Software: http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectroniqueEtLog icielLibre
So what... are you happy with our e-democracy? Do you think ticketting is enough? Do you trust the peaple in power to organise free election... today... tomorrow... for ever?
David GLAUDE Web master of PourEVA: Pour une Ethique du Vote Automatisé.

For french speaking, there is a web site telling about the BAD situation in Belgium: http://www.poureva.be/
The source code provided for Belgium is full of missing piece replaced by //Confidentiel/Confidentieel//.
There is no way to make sure this is the code really used durring the election.
Most citizen need to trust expert choosen by the people in power for checking the code and code really in use. Those 9 experts (when they are all comming/selected) don't have the time to check everything and can only analyse what they receive. When they make remarks or have doubt, the thing they propose are not implemented.
I have documented many thing (in french) on http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectronique and a few thing in English (http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/ElectronicVoting)
I have a nice quote from RMS for the peaple that want the program to be Free Software: http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectroniqueEtLog icielLibre
So what... are you happy with our e-democracy? Do you think ticketting is enough? Do you trust the peaple in power to organise free election... today... tomorrow... for ever?
David GLAUDE Web master of PourEVA: Pour une Ethique du Vote Automatisé.

For french speaking, there is a web site telling about the BAD situation in Belgium: http://www.poureva.be/
The source code provided for Belgium is full of missing piece replaced by //Confidentiel/Confidentieel//.
There is no way to make sure this is the code really used durring the election.
Most citizen need to trust expert choosen by the people in power for checking the code and code really in use. Those 9 experts (when they are all comming/selected) don't have the time to check everything and can only analyse what they receive. When they make remarks or have doubt, the thing they propose are not implemented.
I have documented many thing (in french) on http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectronique and a few thing in English (http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/ElectronicVoting)
I have a nice quote from RMS for the peaple that want the program to be Free Software: http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/VoteElectroniqueEtLog icielLibre
So what... are you happy with our e-democracy? Do you think ticketting is enough? Do you trust the peaple in power to organise free election... today... tomorrow... for ever?
David GLAUDE Web master of PourEVA: Pour une Ethique du Vote Automatisé.

>This means that other EU countries must have passed >similar laws over the past few months, can anyone >who knows comment on this?

You are right. So far Greece, Italy and Denmark has adapted their national copyright laws and others will follow. More info about the situation can be found from here: http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/EUCD-Status

We managed to postpone the implementation in Finland (the law was actually sent back from Parliament, party because it was very badly written, partly because it was over-reaching) but it will come back sooner or later. As long as the directive exists as today, there's not so much what can be done.

Ville

PS. We (EDRI) are starting a campaign to minimize the damage in Central and Eastern Europe. If you are from the region and want to actually do something, please contact me!

The mozilla developers will have a get together: http://eu.mozdev.org/Brussels2003/schedule.html

And here is the schedule for the PostgreSQL talks http://candle.pha.pa.us/fosdem/

If you are interested in Embedded devices you might find the following interesting: http://www.fosdem.org/index/dev_room/dev_room_embe dded

The Slashdot story link above points to a 404 Yahoo story.

The only ref I came across (in, we'll 5 seconds of looking. Damn that ADD) was this one from 2002-12-20 which states that only Greece has passed it.

Sure be nice if the /. ed's would just inline a small detail like that instead of linking it in.

For a status of the implementation of the EUCD, look here .

Too bad my country didn't see why the EUCD is totally bogus. I'm not allowed to buy my region 1 DVD's here in Denmark anymore, so I have to import them. My favourite DVD stores are closing. :-(

Since a lot of posts in this thread are about the European Copyright Directive (EUCD) I would like to give a brief summary:

The EUCD has been passed. This means that the member states must implement it in their national legislation. They should have done so by Dec 22 '02 but only Denmark and Greece made it. Status reports here. Norway's not a member of the EU.

The EUCD can be overturned in two ways:
1. In the European Court.
This means that somebody challenges the directive for being invalid under the EU treaty. It could be.
It's hard to get a case before the European Court, so this would probably need backing by one of the member states. This is being looked into, but it's not easy.

2. Through normal legislative process.
The EUCD article 12(1) states that "Not later than 22 December 2004" the Commission shall report on the application of the directive. Regarding article 6 (The bad one) "it shall examine in particular whether that Article confers a sufficient level of protection and whether acts which are permitted by law are being adversely affected by the use of effective technological measures [DRM]. Where necessary, in particular to ensure the functioning of the internal market ... it shall submit proposals for amendments to this Directive."

We definitely do intend to influence that report and have article 6 amended, but the entertainment industry is doing the same, so this isn't easy either.
On the other hand the directive was forged with very little public attention to article 6, so nearly all attention on the case would be in our favour.

The status of the European Copyright Directive (EUCD) is updated in this wiki.

I should also point out, that the EUCD is late, not overturned. The countries are still obliged to implement it.

EUCD stand for EUropean Copyright Directive.

In Belgium Association Electronique LIBRE is leading the fight against the directive.

The problem is that member state of Europe MUST implement this directive into state law. If a legal conflict take place, plaintif can go to the above court (European Justice?) and gain it there.

The delay in implementing just mean national politics start to understand the issue, but reverting this might be difficult.

David GLAUDE

PS: If (You==Belgian) Then contact AEL EndIf

Don't forget, our new Danish law is an implementation of the EU InfoSec directive. Other EU contries will follow - just wait and see. Wake up people!

And yes, it grieves me to see that Laserdisken will close their store here in Copenhagen. I even bought my LD's there - RIP.

I hope the USA gets into loads of trouble because of bad laws about (electronic) intellectual property. That's the only way the politicians here in Europa will have their eyes opened before we have similar laws.

(Nearly) too late for DMCA sec. 1201

Still time for Software Patents

Do your part! Join the European fight! Find your local partner.