Slashdot Mirror
Domain: nased.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to nased.org.
Comments · 12
-
Re:Versions; Are you sure? Source?
The latest version of Diebold's GEMS software that was certified in California is 117.17; the audit revealed that counties were using other versions, such as 117.20, 117.22, 117.23, 118.18, and 118.18.02. The audit also revealed that three counties -- Los Angeles, Trinity and Lassen -- were using software versions that had not been approved for use at the federal level.
Are you sure? Do you have a source?
The reason why I ask is because the National Association of State Election Directors has an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems. According to the Updated NASED List of Qualified Voting Systems (12/05/03 - Current), the following Diebold voting systems qualify:
- Company: Diebold
- Voting System/System Component: GEMS 1-18-18
- Software: GEMS 1-18-18
- Hardware/Firmware: AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter (formerly ES-2000) Firmware version 1.94W
AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter Firmware version 1.96.4
AcuVote TS Precinct Counter Rev 6 version 1.0.2 (Touch) - System ID # / Qualified to '90 or '02 VSS: N03060011818
- Final Report Date: 7/8/2003
Further, the Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" *OR* pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors." Thus, the Diebold systems approved by NASED should satisfy the voluntary voting systems requirements for federal elections.
-
Re:Versions; Are you sure? Source?
The latest version of Diebold's GEMS software that was certified in California is 117.17; the audit revealed that counties were using other versions, such as 117.20, 117.22, 117.23, 118.18, and 118.18.02. The audit also revealed that three counties -- Los Angeles, Trinity and Lassen -- were using software versions that had not been approved for use at the federal level.
Are you sure? Do you have a source?
The reason why I ask is because the National Association of State Election Directors has an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems. According to the Updated NASED List of Qualified Voting Systems (12/05/03 - Current), the following Diebold voting systems qualify:
- Company: Diebold
- Voting System/System Component: GEMS 1-18-18
- Software: GEMS 1-18-18
- Hardware/Firmware: AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter (formerly ES-2000) Firmware version 1.94W
AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter Firmware version 1.96.4
AcuVote TS Precinct Counter Rev 6 version 1.0.2 (Touch) - System ID # / Qualified to '90 or '02 VSS: N03060011818
- Final Report Date: 7/8/2003
Further, the Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" *OR* pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors." Thus, the Diebold systems approved by NASED should satisfy the voluntary voting systems requirements for federal elections.
-
Re:Versions; Are you sure? Source?
The latest version of Diebold's GEMS software that was certified in California is 117.17; the audit revealed that counties were using other versions, such as 117.20, 117.22, 117.23, 118.18, and 118.18.02. The audit also revealed that three counties -- Los Angeles, Trinity and Lassen -- were using software versions that had not been approved for use at the federal level.
Are you sure? Do you have a source?
The reason why I ask is because the National Association of State Election Directors has an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems. According to the Updated NASED List of Qualified Voting Systems (12/05/03 - Current), the following Diebold voting systems qualify:
- Company: Diebold
- Voting System/System Component: GEMS 1-18-18
- Software: GEMS 1-18-18
- Hardware/Firmware: AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter (formerly ES-2000) Firmware version 1.94W
AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter Firmware version 1.96.4
AcuVote TS Precinct Counter Rev 6 version 1.0.2 (Touch) - System ID # / Qualified to '90 or '02 VSS: N03060011818
- Final Report Date: 7/8/2003
Further, the Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" *OR* pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors." Thus, the Diebold systems approved by NASED should satisfy the voluntary voting systems requirements for federal elections.
-
Re:Versions; Are you sure? Source?
The latest version of Diebold's GEMS software that was certified in California is 117.17; the audit revealed that counties were using other versions, such as 117.20, 117.22, 117.23, 118.18, and 118.18.02. The audit also revealed that three counties -- Los Angeles, Trinity and Lassen -- were using software versions that had not been approved for use at the federal level.
Are you sure? Do you have a source?
The reason why I ask is because the National Association of State Election Directors has an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems. According to the Updated NASED List of Qualified Voting Systems (12/05/03 - Current), the following Diebold voting systems qualify:
- Company: Diebold
- Voting System/System Component: GEMS 1-18-18
- Software: GEMS 1-18-18
- Hardware/Firmware: AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter (formerly ES-2000) Firmware version 1.94W
AccuVote-OS Precinct Counter Firmware version 1.96.4
AcuVote TS Precinct Counter Rev 6 version 1.0.2 (Touch) - System ID # / Qualified to '90 or '02 VSS: N03060011818
- Final Report Date: 7/8/2003
Further, the Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" *OR* pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors." Thus, the Diebold systems approved by NASED should satisfy the voluntary voting systems requirements for federal elections.
-
Has OVS attempted to get their system certified?
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" or pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors."
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and, most importantly,
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
Has the Open Voting Consortium made any attempt to get their software certified?
-
Has OVS attempted to get their system certified?
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" or pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors."
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and, most importantly,
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
Has the Open Voting Consortium made any attempt to get their software certified?
-
Has OVS attempted to get their system certified?
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" or pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors."
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and, most importantly,
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
Has the Open Voting Consortium made any attempt to get their software certified?
-
Has OVS attempted to get their system certified?
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. The FAQ indicates that to meet the standards, an election system must satisfy either "FEC's voting system standards" or pass tests "by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors."
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and, most importantly,
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
Has the Open Voting Consortium made any attempt to get their software certified?
-
States Adhering to the Voluntary Federal Standard
Why don't we have a Federal Standard? I mean with all the problems I have been hearing about how some county's voting problems vary from county to county.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
-
States Adhering to the Voluntary Federal Standard
Why don't we have a Federal Standard? I mean with all the problems I have been hearing about how some county's voting problems vary from county to county.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
-
States Adhering to the Voluntary Federal Standard
Why don't we have a Federal Standard? I mean with all the problems I have been hearing about how some county's voting problems vary from county to county.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.
-
States Adhering to the Voluntary Federal Standard
Why don't we have a Federal Standard? I mean with all the problems I have been hearing about how some county's voting problems vary from county to county.
The Federal Election Commission has a FAQ About The National Voluntary Voting System Standards. According to the FAQ, "[a]s of April 2001, the following States have adopted the FEC's voting system standards *OR* require the testing of systems against the standards by independent testing authorities (ITAs) designated by the National Association of State Election Directors":
Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
The National Association of State Election Directors has, among other things:
(1) a List of NASED Certified Systems;
(2) an Updated List of NASED Certified Systems; and
(3) an Overview of the Certification Process.