Slashdot Mirror


Florida Voting Machine Logs Reveal Anomalies

boot1780 writes "Having 'successfully sued former Palm Beach County (FL) Supervisor of Elections Theresa LePore to get the audit records for the 2004 presidential election,' Black Box Voting reports that the 'internal logs of at least 40 Sequoia touch-screen voting machines reveal that votes were time and date-stamped as cast two weeks before the election, sometimes in the middle of the night.' Besides the date discrepancies, they claim to have discovered countless other errors and anomalies, including a case of one voting machine being 'powered down 128 times during the election'." Given the findings here, can we have a do-over?

27 of 819 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, quitcher whinin' by Jim+in+Buffalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quitcher whinin' 'bout the digital voting machines. You know as well as I do that the voting machine companies are wiser when it comes to choosing leaders than all you unwashed ignorant masses. (Sarcasm aside, I do hope this makes the national news)

    --
    This sig, aah-ah, is comin' like a ghost-sig...
  2. Who counts the votes/Who decides what's important by Angry+Toad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A new factor has come up in to addition to Stalin's old maxim "He who votes decides nothing; he who counts the votes decides everything."

        Something like "Who finds out about corruption is irrelevant; who gets to decide what kinds of corruption are "Serious Stories" versus "Tinfoil Hat" material decides the rest."

        Or something like that. Since the media refuses to acknowledge that there are serious questions about legitimacy under electronic voting, pointing out the problems probably doesn't matter any more - any evidence of problems is perforce "nutty conspiracy theory material" and so is a non-starter.

  3. Devil's Advocate... by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They found anomolies in 40 machines? How many machines were there in total? Did all of the anomolies favor one candidate or were they seemingly random? Was the constantly rebooting machine having hardware problems? Were the machines with wierd date stamps having hardware clock issues?

    I'm not sure why this is instantly regarded as some sort of conspiracy rather than either hardware problems or incompetent voting machine vendors. Folks might want to consider the more mundane potential causes of these problems before heading for their tinfoil hat drawer.

    1. Re:Devil's Advocate... by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Were the machines with wierd date stamps having hardware clock issues?

      Probably more likely that they were having "moron operating the machine" issues.

    2. Re:Devil's Advocate... by mtenhagen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ofcourse its highly likely that these issue where caused by hardware issues or stupid operaters. The issue is that how do we ever know? It took 2 years even to get this logs public.

      The issue is that black box voting machines can not be checked and are open to fraudulent/faulty actions.

      All these issues should have been identified on election day so that appropriate actions could be taken (revote, dismiss votes, no issue, etc...)

      TRANSPARANCY is the key,

      --
      200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
    3. Re:Devil's Advocate... by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 4, Informative

      Black box voting is non-partisan. They are fighting for open voting. They are not trying to prove that Bush stole the election (Although they might do that during their investigations) they are trying to show that the black box voting machines are going to kill democracy.

    4. Re:Devil's Advocate... by starm_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that using a printed balot as a paper trail is such an obvious solution and the fact that printed receips are so easy to implement is what makes the chosen convoluted, hackable, no-recount alternative so suspicious. What honest and experienced company would chose anything but the easy and elegant solution of a printout considering that it is already implemented on every ATM and all cash registers if not because they want to open the possibility to election fraud? No amount of electronic tweaking will make the system secure. There is always a weak link. Even if the company had the best intentions in the world, how can they be certain that a lone partisan coder wouldn't sneak a line of code within what I'm sure are millions of lines? This could be done at any point in the chain of programs that handle the votes; from the user interface, to the final tally, through the individual machine databases, the talying computer, the flash memory files etc. etc. etc. I have plenty programming experience and I can tell you that it would be very easy to implement this "bug" so that it happened ONLY on the day of the election so that previous and following tests would show no bias. Consider, If you were a company and you were designing a voting machine you would have two options: 1)Hire an expensive team of developers responsible for surveying all the code components of your system to make sure each and everyone one of them are 100% secure and bug free. A feat that no leading software company (say MS) has succeeded in doing for their own software even after decades and millions of man-hours of debugging and re-engineering. Or, 2) add a small printer similar or identical to the ones used for printing lotto tickets or even those good old receipt printers that are part of *every* cash register. These receips would then be hand veryfied by each voter and then put in a ballot box for future verification and recounts. Which option do you think is less expensive? What rational is there for a company to chose option one?

    5. Re:Devil's Advocate... by TPS+Report · · Score: 4, Informative
      TRANSPARANCY is the key

      No, actually, the key is F2654hD4. :)

      Quote:

      All of the data on [the Diebold] storage device is encrypted using a single, hardcoded DES key:

      #define DESKEY ((des_key*)"F2654hD4")

      Note that this value is not a hex representation of a key, nor does it appear to be randomly generated. Instead, the bytes in the string "F2654hD4 " are fed directly into the DES key scheduler... from the CVS logs, we see this particular key has been used without change since December 1998 ...


      rofl.
      --
      I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven...
    6. Re:Devil's Advocate... by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure why this is instantly regarded as some sort of conspiracy rather than either hardware problems or incompetent voting machine vendors.

      Because we'd be stupid not to at least consider the possiblity.

      Look, if you've ever dealt with government contracting, you know that having friends in the right places is huge. Over the past decade or so it's gotten worse -- I won't say worse than ever, but the trend is definitely the wrong way. If you don't think that people go as close to bribery as they can legally manage you're naive If you don't think that some people when tempted to step over the line do it, you're a fool.

      Once you've stepped over that line, you've accepted doing business illegally. The question is what is the most economically way to deal in corruption on the scale you practice it.

      Only partisan pinheads automatically believe every accusation or conspiracy theory that comes up, but these accusations and theories serve an important purpose. Sometimes that creaking sound you hear downstairs is a burglar.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  4. No National Voting System? by abscissa · · Score: 5, Informative

    Free market voting?

    In Canada we have a national voting system. Voting is the same wherever you go, no matter what part of the country you are in. Each person writes a little X on a piece of paper next to the cantidate of his choice, then you put it in a box. There are serial numbers on the ballots, so if any ballots are missing, duplicated, or anything else is funny, there is a way to tell. (Not tracable, though, -- ie you can't tell who voted for whom.)

    There are no computers in national elections and there is a paper trail that can be recounted as many times as anyone wishes. And results don't take weeks to come in either... or months for that matter. We always seem to have our Prime Minister and government chosen within a few hours after the polls have closed...

  5. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy!

    Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun!

    -Thanks folks, I'm here all afternoon.

  6. Re:Take back our elections by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Does anybody still beleive that this election wasn't fixed? I mean, really. Of course it'll never be proven, but it's so freakin' obvious. Incompetence can only explain so many problems - I think we've passed that point a long time ago.

    Its an appealing thought. I mean, the alternative is to believe that more than half the country was dumb enough to believe that the same jackasses who failed to stop 9/11 and royally screwed up in Iraq were the best guys to protect us from further terrorist attacks and the best guys to fix Iraq.

    There's something very comforting about conspiracy theories in general. I mean, if it's a conspiracy you at least have a chance to fight that; it's just the actions of a few people. But if the problems of the world emerge from the apathy, stupidity, ignorance, greed, and hate of billions of people, including ourselves... well, that's a little more difficult to tackle and a little more depressing to think about.

    It must all be the CIA's fault.

  7. Re:What's new... by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is not the democracy you are looking for... They can go about their business...

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  8. Re:How hard is it? by Goaway · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, it's called "pen, paper and sealed box".

    It's massively inefficient, which is a good thing in elections. Efficiency only makes cheating easier.

  9. Re:ZOMG HAX by thesandtiger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only way someone can beat you is by cheating, right?

    If there were only one or two instances where people said "Hm, something slightly fishy seems to have happened..." then you'd likely have a point.

    But when there are dozens of reports of voting machines not working correctly, and when each and every time the errors seem to be in favor of the party that won... Yeah, I'd say calling shenannigans is justified.

    Maybe it'll turn out that the errors didn't actually occur - maybe it'll turn out that the tracking software is fucked, but the votes were counted correctly. Maybe it'll turn out that there was some vast conspiracy. Maybe it'll turn out that the Democrats would have gotten *fewer* votes if the machines had worked properly. Whatever the results, what's important is this:

    The machines don't seem to be working correctly when handling a very important task. We need to investigate this, no matter what. It isn't a matter of sour grapes (well, except for some people, maybe) but it IS a matter of finding out what the hell is going on.

    Surely you don't think that we shouldn't investigate anomalous situations?

    --
    Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
  10. Stop whining - indeed. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Let me give you a piece of advice. Regardless of whether you believe that's true, never never mention those reasons in a discussion with strangers. It will only have two effects: getting the people who agree with you more pointlessly agitated, and making the people who disagree with you think you're a nutjob. It will not win anyone over. Whether you are right or wrong is immaterial.

    Something many people here and in other predominantly-left forums seem to be missing is that many Americans truly, honestly believed that Bush was the better candidate. I doubt that your average Republican voted for Bush any more automatically than the typical Democrat voted for Kerry, and yet everyone seems to think that only Republicans were partisan voters. Well, guess what: there are sheep on both sides of the fence. Singling out one group of them will only alienate the bloc of voters you should be trying to persuade.

    I voted for Bush for various reasons, but I would probably stand alongside you if a recall vote were held today. The time for partisan sniping is over. We need to work together if we want to make a difference.

    As a side note to fellow Republicans, his closing advice is just as valid for us. Contact the RNC and make your opinion known. Write to your representatives and senate and let them know that you disagree with executive branch policies. This is your party: step up and take charge of it.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:Stop whining - indeed. by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a side note to fellow Republicans, his closing advice is just as valid for us. Contact the RNC and make your opinion known. Write to your representatives and senate and let them know that you disagree with executive branch policies. This is your party: step up and take charge of it.

      This is a great point! While I think Kerry is a democrat who is on par with the rest of his party's values, etc., Bush is WAY out of line with what the republican party was known for - and what longtime republican voters were assuming.

      When I think traditional republican, I think personal privacy, constitutional protection, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism. But Bush, who got all those always-vote-republican votes, has completely departed from those first three key traditional republican values!

      I wouldn't mind so much if traditional republicans were in power, but the Republican party has been hijacked. Just like they used Colin Powell's reputation to trick people into believing them, they're using the Republican party to push their own selfish, money-driven agendas instead of what the Republican party used to be about and what voters were expecting.

      Longtime republicans should be careful who they're voting for in the coming elections. You can't just trust the (R) next to a name anymore.

    2. Re:Stop whining - indeed. by Tim+Doran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      many Americans truly, honestly believed that Bush was the better candidate

      What does that have to do with anything? Many Americans believed Ross Perot was the better candidate, but nobody argues that he deserved the job or - if he managed to force his way into office - that we should shut up about it.

      I voted for Bush for various reasons

      Ahh... now I see where you're coming from.

      The fact is, about a half-million more Americans voted for Al Gore than for George Bush. As for who was more partisan, consider the relentless smear campaigns carried out against Bush opponents Anne Richards ("she's a lesbian!"), Al Gore (everything you can think of from "he claims to have invented the Internet" to "he grew up in a fancy Washington hotel"), and John Kerry (the Swift Boat liars).

      Consider the shenanigans carried out in Florida in 2000 that exposed the weaknesses in American democracy and showed just how open to abuse the system is. The Republicans were simply more partisan, beating on the system without regard for the spirit and principle of the rules to get the result they wanted.

      Consider the (more subtle) shenanigans in the 2004 election, particularly in Ohio, where voters in Democratic districts had to wait as much as 8 hours to vote and had their right to vote challenged in massive numbers by Republican partisans at the polling stations. This was made possible by Republicans in the Governor's office and Republicans in control of the election. Voters in Republican-leaning districts did not face these modern-day Jim Crow measures.

      Now, consider all the shady stuff that's so difficult to prove - it took years just to get logs from these electronic voting machines, and they're FULL of suspicious data. Consider the 11th-hour "correction" in the voting data on election night 2004 - we're asked to accept that the exit polls were way off for the first time in history, and somehow the numbers jumped just enough in just the right places (all at the same time!) to put Bush over the top. Yet anyone who talks about this is smeared as a "nutjob"...

      Who is more partisan? Republicans. One of the great failures of the Democratic party in the last 5 years has been to underestimate the ruthlessness and lack of principle on the part of the Republicans. Anybody who claims "well, both sides do it, everybody is partisan these days, a pox on both their houses" has either not been paying attention, or has drunk the Republican kool-aid.

  11. FDR by qwyeth · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder, do you consider FDR to be the "jackass" who failed to stop Pearl Harbor?

    Now that you mention it, FDR, along with General Marshall, General Gerow, Admiral Stark and Admiral Turner, did fail to stop the attack. It was strategically obvious that Pearl Harbor would be the target when (and if!) the Japanese attacked... On December 5, 1941 FDR received the decrypted Japanese declaration of war, and he did nothing about it. The message was never sent to Admiral Kimmel and General Short, the commander in chief & commanding general, respectively, of the pacific fleet. Our jackass-in-chief FDR wanted to go to war on the 'moral high ground,' in the eyes of the public.

    But that'll never make it into high school history books. History is written by the winners, and it's common knowledge that we were taken by surprise, and that FDR was (overall) a really swell guy.

  12. Guinness Voice: Brilliant! by TPS+Report · · Score: 4, Informative
    It amazes me that the voting box companies, who are paid disgusting amounts of taxpayer money to develop these things, can't figure out how to code properly. Yes, I know Sequoia is the company discussed in the article, but Diebold has 80% of the voting market. So if they can't do it right as the market leader, I'm afraid of what will be found when/if someone demands a code audit on the Sequoia stuff.

    Diebold :
    (Support Guide - Review) (pdf):

    4.4 Key management and other cryptographic issues with the vote and audit records [...] the audit logs are encrypted and checksummed before being written to the storage device. Unfortunately, neither the encrypting nor the checksumming is done with established, secure techniques. [...] (Recall that we have already discussed the lack of cryptography in other potions of the system.) [...] All of the data on a storage device is encrypted using a single, hardcoded DES [22] key: #define DESKEY ((des_key*)"F2654hD4"). Note that this value is not a hex representation of a key, nor does it appear to be randomly generated. Instead, the bytes in the string "F2654hD4 " are fed directly into the DES key scheduler. [...] from the CVS logs, we see this particular key has been used without change since December 1998 [...] ...

    In June 2005, [Kevin Shelley, the California Secretary of State], reported that when given access to Diebold vote-counting computers, Bev Harris- a critic of Diebold's voting machines - was able to make 65,000 votes disappear simply by changing the memory card that stores voting results for one that had been altered. Although the machines are supposed to record changes to data stored in the system, they showed no record of tampering after the memory cards were swapped. In response, a spokesperson for the Department of State said that, "Information on a blog site is not viable or credible."

    ... [insert completely awed silence here]
    .
    I think I'll buy "C++ Programming for Dummies" and faxes a quick resume to Diebold
    --
    I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven...
    1. Re:Guinness Voice: Brilliant! by NMerriam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And someone who has physical access to the old paper systems can't make votes disappear almost as easily?

      I dunno, how exactly would you make 65,000 pieces of paper disappear without anyone noticing? I think you could probably hide a few in your pockets, but what about the next few thousand pounds of votes? You certainly couldn't do it in a few seconds or without a lot of accomplices.

      I appreciate you trying to put things in perspective -- but the entire point of electronic voting is that it was supposed to be MORE secure and MORE fraud-resistant than paper. What we have right now is, if anything, the worst of both worlds -- just as tamper-able as old voting machines, with the added bonus of being able to magically change thousands or millions of votes with no more skill than it takes to do a basic card trick.

      When an entire city's electorate is represented on a chip the size of a postage stamp, the requirements for physical secrity are much greater than they ever were for what was literally truckloads of paper. And the requirements for auditing and athenticity verification are that much higher.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
  13. Inappropriate caution, IMO by Elemenope · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Programming Voting Machines isn't exactly designing rockets, you know. When the task is fairly simple, any anomalies require for explanation either an escalating (and unlikely) level of incompetence...or malfeasance. It's not crazy to say: these machines are made to count and for this simple task they fail depressingly often. WTF? Now, given no direct evidence of specific malfeasance that obviously benefits one party over another, conspiracy theories are premature. However, starting to look in this direction based soley on the failure rate is not as crazy as you make it out to be.

    --
    All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
  14. crime/motive/opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every day almost we hear about another computer exploit, some drive by malware download, another botnet, etc, all so some scumbags can make a few thousand dollars. That's it, a few thou. It's easy enough to understand the motivation, and easy enough to see that they use unsecured computers and peoples naievete to accomplish this task.

    Now, just imagine,if the scumware guys OWN the computer that you and everyone else uses. Now imagine the scumware guys are looking at CONTROLLING THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT by OWNING that computer.

    How much is that worth? Really, how much motivation is there to control TRILLIONS of dollars, not thousands, TRILLIONS and the largest war machine on the planet? Do you see any incentive there, or is all this just another series of "coincidences"? Coups don't happen around the world all the time? Where's the magic document from the truth fairies that says the US can never fall to coup plotters?

    Now look at the track record so far of what we have found out these folks, how many lies have been drug out of them? How many people have perished based on the lies, how may large corporate insiders connected to the government have profitted immensely?

    You can't do the math on this? What's it going to take, them coming on TV and just announcing it? You fail to be able to take into account all the other information out there? This latest is just another large chunk of evidence, look at ALL of it together, what do you see? I see some serious crimes right up into treason,and the probable perps with the clear motive and the clear opportunity.

  15. Re:Take back our elections by jc42 · · Score: 5, Informative

    [D]o you consider FDR to be the "jackass" who failed to stop Pearl Harbor?

    The main quibble here is the use of the word "the", which implies uniqueness. If you read the histories about the Pearl Harbor attack, you'll find that there's general agreement that there was widespread incompetence all along the US chain of command. They pretty much had the evidence in the hours before the attack, but a combination of failure to understand and failure to believe the evidence led to the disaster. But it wasn't one person's failure; it was failure of the entire system to use the information that it had.

    This is similar to our current situation with 9/11, Katrina, the Iraq war, etc. George Bush isn't the sole "jackass" responsible for any of these. It's a systemic problem, with incompetence combined with corruption at all levels.

    One of the clearest examples is the admission that they had tapes of the perpetrators' conversations days and weeks before the 9/11 attacks. But they didn't have enough translators fluent in Arabic to get them translated in time. This problem existed despite several decades of growing problems with Arabic-speaking radicals, including the earlier bombings of embassies, the Cole attack, and the earlier attempt to bomb the World Trade Center. Anyone competent saw the need for more Arabic translators, and there are at least a million Arabic-speaking Americans who could have been hired.

    Further incompetence is shown by the fact that there aren't nearly as many Arabic-speaking Americans willing to do the job now. The widespread anti-Arab attacks and discrimination of the past few years have made sensible Arabic speakers very wary of getting involved with the US government. If you want a clear example of why, google for "Sibel Edmonds". Her story isn't an anomaly; it's a good example of a government agency attacking and driving out out of the people who could have done the most to help. There are a number of other similar stories.

    But there isn't a single "jackass" responsible for this. It's a systemic problem that can't be solved by replacing just one high-up jackass.

    (The widespread "English only" attitude of Americans is also part of the problem, but that's a different issue.)

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  16. Re:Caution in your Commentary by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And that's why George W. Bush is a symptom of what's wrong with the US today, not the cause. People like you, however, are.

    While I applaud you for trying to maintain a sane and rational outlook and avoid falling into these conspiracy theories, this issue has far too many coincidences for you to dismiss like that. What would it take for you to change your stance from "no biggie, just a little smoke, no fire" to "fuck me, that's an awful lot of coincidence, maybe I should entertain the possibility that something is wrong here."

    Hell, even assuming there's zero conspiracy, just a lot of blunders, should still make you nervous as it still means there's been a perversion of democracy.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  17. Re:Disingenuous by swillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know as well as I do that this isn't so.

    I don't know it at all, and I posit that you don't, either. Everything I've read from Black Box has been focused entirely on the machines, without respect to which race or who won. They've published as much about congressional and even city council races as they have about the presidential election. If you have some evidence that they have a political agenda beyond making sure the voting is honest, cought it up. Innuendo is just a waste of time.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  18. Democratic Socialism vs. Republican Facism by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most Republicans would rather have a hopefully salvageable Republican administration in charge than a neo-socialist Democratic one. ...the Democrats have become a new socialist party...

    The current Democratic party is Socialist, to the extent that they favor using public money to provide services to people that private companies could have provided - like health care, education, construction, retirement benefits, etc.

    The current Republican party is Facist, to the extent that they favor using public money to benefit large corporations and their leaders, and they collude with the media to keep the public in a misinformed frenzy.

    I'll take Democratic Socialism over Republican Facism ANY day.