Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Diebold to Pay $2.6M Due to Insecure Voting Machines

Posted by michael on from the but-you-voted-with-them-anyway dept.

sunilk writes "In a short period, Diebold has been at the center of several problems. Now it seeks to settle the lawsuit filed against it by the State of California by paying $2.6 million. Settlement comes because of flaws in the Diebold systems that could compromise election results."

4 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Took them long enough by mg2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When the San Diego Registrar of Voters implemented the Diebold system, they went ahead and got rid of thousands of these little plastic voting booths we used to use. Also, the stylus voting equipment is gone -- all replaced by shiny new touchscreen voting equipment.

    Come election day, half of the machines booted into Windows CE Explorer instead of the voting software... whoops

    So now, the hardware is being re-certified, the old voting equipment is gone, and San Diego is using (Diebold Manufactured) optical scanners for voting on a temporary basis.

    If these issues (and expenses) have been present in other counties of California, I fail to see how 2.6mil is a decent settlement. Sorry.

  2. Get in the experts by ConcreteGnome · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The biggest and best democracy in the universe has no idea if their last election is valid. Hmmm.

    1. The United Nations offer a service that may be useful. There a many satisfied clients. Get the UN election observers in.

    2. Swallow some of that arrogant pride and ask some of the other democacies how they do it. Most of them manage to poll their entire country (compulsory voting) with little confusion or uncertainty and even do it within the hours of 9 to 5.

    Idea !
    Subcontract your elections out to experts. Any of the European Union countries, Australia, New Zealand.. They can do it for you.

  3. whoa. by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Alright, I usually frown upon cracking, but someone needs to exploit these machines, and elect Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck. Seriously. No one in the media will give a care about computer security until something happens. If a group of counties in California go 99 percent for a pair of cartoons, I promise you that heads will roll at Diebold. And if the media doesn't pick up the story, no one will do anything about it. So, geeks of the world, go out to your polling places, and crack for democracy!

    The real fun begins when Disney sues to have some of it's people put in place as president instead of mickey mouse, who was unavailable at the time.

    --
    SAILING MISHAP
  4. Re:2.6 million? by caino59 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government

    negligence: the trait of neglecting responsibilities and lacking concern

    Sorry, but my definition doesn't really define gross negligence. Had they merely neglected to fix known security issues, it would be negligence. However, they made changes AFTER government certification. That's a little beyond negligence, that hints at malicious intent. After all, why would one make changes to a system after being certified - if not to compromise it in some way - then why? They obviously didnt make changes to improve or fix security - so where did their intentions lie?

    nice try, but no. glad you're not my defense attorney.