Slashdot Mirror


Diebold to Pay $2.6M Due to Insecure Voting Machines

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."

20 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. I hope they don't just settle... by nonregistered · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that will just set the price of an election!

    1. Re:I hope they don't just settle... by h4rm0ny · · Score: 5, Insightful


      I'm unclear. Who get's the 2.6 million? The government they just chose?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  2. 2.6 million? by Icarus1919 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How the hell can you put a price on jeopardising one of our constitutional rights? These people broke the law in a big way and lied about it, and they're getting off with this slap on the wrist? People should be put in jail for this.

    Disgusting.

    1. Re:2.6 million? by dissy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed.

      After all, attempting to overthrow the government actually ranks as a crime up with murder. Both carry life sentences, though I'm not sure if both still can carry the death penalty.

      When terrorists tried it, we started a war.
      When a company on home soil trys it, they get a ticket :/

    2. Re:2.6 million? by caino59 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Diebold made changes to their systems after being certified.

      That goes beyond incompetence - I'm sure they understood and knew full well what they were doing. They have lawyers - they knew the details of their contract. They broke it knowingly and willingly.

      Just b/c nothing 'bad' happened (depending on your feelings of the outcome of the election, of course) doesn't mean that it wasn't a possiblity. They knew what the problems were - they were well documented - and never fixed.

  3. I have to ask by rootofevil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How much is a secure, honest, fair election worth? 2.6 million? Thats a drop in the bucket.

    Something to the effect of the vendors machines being overhauled at the expense of the vendor or removed permanently in the state seems a bit more fitting for this degree of failure.

    --
    turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  4. 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.

  5. $2.6 million... by jmcmunn · · Score: 4, Insightful


    So that's how much our the future of our nation is worth? Insecure voting machines that play a part in determining who is elected to office...and it's only worth $2.6 million? What a bunch of B.S., $2.6 million is nothing close to what they should pay, if you ask me.

  6. That's it? by MightyPez · · Score: 4, Funny

    Huh.....I guess many can buy everything.

    Well if democracy costs $2.6 million, how much for a quasi-constitutional theocracy?

  7. why no criminal charges? by belmolis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm disappointed that California didn't pursue criminal charges. A civil suit may be sufficient to deal with honest mistakes, but if, as seems to be the case, Diebold repeatedly made changes to software after certification, that's a deliberate malfeasance. These people need to learn that elections are serious business. These aren't candy machines.

  8. Tell ya what by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Tell ya what Diebold, you keep the 2.6 mil, and give back the election.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  9. This sucks. by PotatoHead · · Score: 4, Informative

    30 percent of our national vote was cast on non-voter-verified electronic voting machines. Ohio also was at about 30 percent.

    Realistically we will never know who exactly was elected this year and that's a big problem.

    Until we can address the voting machine issue proper (with voter-verified votes at a minimum) Americans have lost their democracy for all intents and purposes.

    Interestingly the only state that got this right was frickin Nevada. They did use the machines, but insisted that they produce voter-verified paper trails.

    The rest of the nation could actually learn a thing or two from Nevada of all places.

    In addition to all of that, what I find most hard to swallow is the lack of action on the part of our elected officials to avoid this mess. Election supervisors have known for years literally and bought the machines anyway.

    This whole mess is a crime against the American People. People should be in jail over this. We send people away for far less (like duping a movie).

    Sorry for the rant, but this issue bothers me more than any other because I cannot trust our national election. Even though I live in a state (Oregon) with a pretty solid voting system, my solid vote means nothing in light of Florida and Ohio both with significant election irregularities.

    I am not convinced we actually chose our President this year. Americans should be just a bit more upset about that than they are. We get press reports on the Ukraine yet we see almost nothing about our own failed election.

    Finally, this is not about who won or lost. It's that we will never actually know...

    1. Re:This sucks. by DM9290 · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Realistically we will never know who exactly was elected this year and that's a big problem."

      Why are you trying to confuse the issue?

      It is clear that voters overwelmingly choose George W. Bush to lead the nation for the next 4 years.

      And these election results were specifically chosen to reflect that fact.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
  10. You got it backwards... by TR0GD0RtheBURNiNAT0R · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Well if democracy costs $2.6 million, how much for a quasi-constitutional theocracy?

    I think you need to switch those two...

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  11. Diebold contributions...and the Carter Center by tdhillman · · Score: 5, Informative

    For a little fun, see exactly where a little Diebold campaign money goes:

    from the public record...

    Crowther, John Michael Mr.
    8/27/2003 $2,000.00
    Canton, OH 44708
    Diebold Inc. -[Contribution]
    BUSH-CHENEY '04 INC


    D' Amico, Thomas R. Mr.
    9/3/2003 $2,000.00
    Canton, OH 44718
    Diebold Inc. -[Contribution]
    BUSH-CHENEY '04 INC

    and that /.'ers, is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Never mind that the Carter Center, which supervises elections around the world, considers our systems fubar.

    And yet I do love America still. Curious indeed.

    --
    befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
  12. The Cost to Diebold by lheal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest cost to Diebold is the bad press. Their customers are bureaucrats and politicians, who generally have their finger in the wind.

    Unfortunately most of the focus appears to be to accuse Diebold of trying to steer the election toward the Republicans. While that would be a bad thing of awesome proportions, I think all the talk abou it misses the point.

    The real issue is having an open, verifiable ballot box, so *no one* can abuse the ballot device to affect the results of an election.

    Diebold wants a closed, "certified" ballot box. I don't think they want it that way to influence elections. I think they want it that way because they see secrecy as their best road to a profit. Never mind ensuring the correctness of their programs through open review; that would cost them a business advantage (they think).

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  13. Wow, what a bunch of misplaced anger by CodeWanker · · Score: 4, Funny

    The problem is not with crappy software or rigged machines. The problem we face is that, when a bunch of American voters stood up and protested that they were too stupid to use paper ballots properly, we tried to come up with a pre-school level voting machine instead of saying, "Okay, some people really ARE too stupid to vote."

    --


    "Wow. Now THAT'S a lot of angry Indians." - Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer
  14. 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
  15. How to Hack Diebold Counting Software by michaelaiello · · Score: 4, Informative

    Got bored over the summer and found this document which shows how to get past diebold's password "security" on the counting software and made a video on how I did it. It is beyond silly how easy this is.
    -Mike

  16. Not Just Touchscreens by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Everyone talks about how horribly insecure the touchscreens are.

    But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure.

    Read that, and then read this.

    The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.

    And we've all seen this, about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?

    I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud going on, particularly in Florida counties.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p