Slashdot Mirror
Ohio Audit Reveals More Diebold Problems
armb writes with a link to a Wired Blog entry about irregularities found in Diebold databases from the state of Ohio. The election in question here is November 2006, and the corruption of the entries may raise doubts about accurate tabulations. "Vote totals in two separate databases that should have been identical had different totals. Although Diebold explained that this was part of the system design for separate vote tables to get updated at different times during the tabulation process, the team questioned the wisdom of a design that creates non-identical vote totals. Tables in the database contained elements that were missing date and time stamps that would indicate when information was entered. Entries that did have date/time stamps showed a January 1, 1970 date. The database is built from Microsoft's Jet database engine. The engine, according to Microsoft, is vulnerable to corruption when a lot of concurrent activity is happening with the database, such as what occurs on an election night when results are uploaded and various servers are interacting with the database simultaneously."
But I know from experience with Citrix that Jet does not scale to more than 1000 simultaneous users. This seems to be borderline incompetence to me.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
I programmed with the Jet DB "engine" years ago. I wouldn't even run a web site with it. The only thing I found it useful for was business applications, such as connecting an Excel spreadsheet to Access. But that was years and years ago. Why would anyone write such a large and critical system using Jet today, when even Microsoft tells you not to? The only answer is incompetence.
Developers: We can use your help.
That is an old outdated desktop engine. Databases needs compressing and repairing all the freaking time - want to go multi-user? or over a network? forget it, it's have never performed well in that capacity in ANY version. Microsoft even advises not to use it anymore. They push desktop version of the SQL Server 2005 Engine (and now even have a version that just requires a couple DLLs in the application directory, however I do not know if that is available yet).
Jet Database Engine, a.k.a. Microsoft Access.
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
> The database is built from Microsoft's Jet database engine.
Jet? Shit.
I'm gonna submit proposals to program up a new Mars Rover using Visual Basic!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Good lord, I'd say anything over 10 users is a problem with Jet, from my experience anyways.
Jet is fine for what it is, but like any other tool it has a proper purpose and should not be mis-used.
I don't know the specifics of the Diebold stuff, it would seem to me though if you had one Jet DB on each machine along with a proper upload tool it should work just fine.... at the same time if I was building a voting machine process from scratch I wouldn't think of using it.
fwiw. ymmv.
Arguing on Slashdot is like competing in the Special Olympics...
Is not!
You may win but you're still retarded.
I know you are, but what am I?
I've had very few banking errors using ATMs and I'm quite sure that I am not the only user on the system when I do use them. Why would this company have any trouble with this kind of operation? Is it because there is no accounting so they don't bother to get it right?s -selling-solar.html
--
Vote with your roof! http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
I think this is what you call "not ready for prime time." I much prefer my county's system, which has a Scantron-like form that you fill in with pen and which gets scanned on-site, giving you an instant total-- and an immediate notification if there's an overvote or undervote. Plus there's that handy little paper trail...
Of course, the part that gets me angriest, as a former poll worker, is the fact that there are people who will mess with someone else's vote. You don't do that.
Actually I am a lab rat in an elaborate plot to take over the world.
In the last episode, the capitol building collapsed - and now, the following letter appeared on the broken stairsteps to the Ohio capitol:
"We're sorry that the capitol building collapsed, but it ends up that we used Licoln Logs to build the dome, and it ends up that it collapses when the wind hits it from multiple directions at once.
We've gotten some complaints that we should have expected this, and were "total morons" for choosing such a design. We think this is a gross oversimplification, and more than a little unfair. We used multiple layers of high-quality chewing gum to secure the dome, which required countless hours of chewing, along with thousands of gallons of spittle. When you complain against such a massive effort, you insult the sore mouths of our hard working employees.
Sincerely,
Halliburton CEO
Bozo D. Clown"
Next episode: FEMA picks up the pieces.
Ryan Fenton
this really isn't about MS having a shitty database. It's really about Diebold not knowing how to design a database application. Other than that, I'm just too shocked to say anything while quietly making a mental note to avoid all things called Jet from MS and anything that comes from Diebold.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
When does someone bring them to court over SCREWING UP AN ELECTION.
Seriously, I dont care if the errors caused changed the outcome or not, its fairly clear that they failed, in the worst possible way, to maintain the level of creditability needed for a damn election. This isn't a "oops, my bad" This should be a federal offence with manditory jail time.
No system is perfect, but come on, JET!? Might as well have the vote counted in diffrent states by the party currently in power, would be just as accurate.
They make horrible voting machines, and in TFA it's claimed they tabulate results at the precinct level not the machine level. DUMB.
/. articles will likely continue until they're no longer used, for obvious reasons.
I do understand why Republicans get so defensive about this,but these machines have to GO.
The
Now, I'd never think about developing this on a Microsoft Jet DB, since it's been somewhat deprecated for the MS Desktop SQL Server (MSDE) and SQL Server 2005 Express, which are much better and lightweight enough for a current desktop.
Nonetheless... what MS probably stated is that basically access to a JET Db is not thread safe, which means that concurrent access will cause corruption with a probability directly proportional to the amount of activity. YET if you serialize access to a Jet Db (which is a necessary and basic requirement given that it's not thread safe) there shouldn't be a fear of corruption, unless the API is buggy. If each voting station has a Jet Db and they all get exported to a central (thread safe) db then there's no need for concurrent access to any of the individual Jet DBs, and there shouldn't be a big fear of data corruption (which, anyway, can be verified somewhat easily).
As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
In point of fact, there is a difference between "requiring perfection" and "avoiding obvious incompetence". Just, y'know, for future reference.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
> Do you honestly think that no one ... cares about how electronic
...
> voting is implemented, and are only upset that a democrat wasn't
> elected in the last election?
Yes, next question.
BTW, when Bush came into office the solar system had nine planets
[Insert pithy quote here]
Look, let's say I had hired an accountant. Then, let's say that I found out that he was keeping two separate databases of my finances. Let's also say that they had different totals in them, and he was only showing me one of them.
Not only would I fire his ass, but I'd make sure to press criminal charges of fraud. Why are these creeps from Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S, et. all not in prison yet?
Diebold makes ATMs; don't tell me that they can't get something as simple as a vote database right. Occam's Razor points to outright fraud, not to simple incompetence.
Militant Agnostic: "I don't know, and damn it, neither do you!"
After seeing how they develop, I absolutely like the idea of their going back to handling my money.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
While there's no such thing as perfect, we can still try to get reasonably close. For elections we can sure get a lot closer to real accuracy. A few people will always claim it's fixed. But when you have multiple documentary films, books, and protests there's obviously something wrong.
Developers: We can use your help.
I consider voting machines to be a pretty straightforward application of computer technology: counting things. There are thousands of examples of this being done with complete accuracy. Heck, Wal-Mart always knows how many boxes of ice cream it has in every store and the exact temperature of each freezer. Diebold gets the contract and you'd think they were trying to land a man on Pluto.
Voting machines need to be an open-source project anyway. We ALL need to know what's going on in those things.
Reading this made me think about my time doing safety critical systems (it fails, someone dies) and its really stunning to think that something like voting in a democracy isn't considered mission critical to the country.
There really is no excuse for voting to not be done on a comparative basis e.g. every vote to be checked via 3 different software lines (this isn't rocket science) and a voting system to then confirm that the vote is being applied correctly. This vote should then be written to two (at least) data sources to enable reconciliation at the end.
This is a freaking implementation of a check-box system where is the sodding complexity that means its expensive to be professional.
Voting in a democracy is mission critical, to not consider it that way is to say that voting doesn't matter.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
NO! There is only OBVIOUSLY something wrong if there is EVIDENCE that something is wrong.
Mob, Press and Documentary video TV accusations do not constitute legitimate evidence unless they have facts to back up their claims (not saying they don't).
Guilt by association is one Logical Fallacy which is throw around a lot these days.
Coincidence? Gee, I wonder...
Real database engines keep complete transaction logs.
Which is why when explaining a result matters, you use a real database engine, not something like jet, which is simply a library to maintain indexed files.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
George W. Bush!!!!!....wait a minute...WTF?!?!?!?....
It was always thus... Two spaces after a period is only appropriate in circumstances where all characters are the same width, such as an old-school typewriter. So nobody “decided” that it would be that way “on the Internet;” we just stopped using the special-case rules that sprung up a few decades prior when we were using technology that wasn’t capable of proportionally spaced type.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
So, I've worked federal elections in Canada multiple times, and we *do* accomplish most of what you suggest above. The election is managed at the federal level by an arms-length organization.
The public is allowed to watch at every step of the process (especially counting).
Voting times are staggered across the country so that everyone learns what happened at the same time.
All the ballots *are* exactly the same. This is not a difficult task.
The ballots have only the name of the candidate and the name of the party. Voters of all different ethnicities (this is Toronto) seem to have no problem. Also, we try to station people who speak the language of the neighbourhood at the polling stations. If the voters really need to, they bring a copy of the literature with them, and find the name which is the same on the ballot, and mark their 'X'.
The eligibility standard is very simple: All Canadian citizens 18yrs or older on election day who are resident in that riding may vote. Credentials are not required unless in the case of a challenge, or if they need to register or change ridings.
They can register at any time up to the end of election day, at the polling station. This is important, so that people will not be disenfranchised.
The purpose of having thousands of election workers and having distributed counting is so that mistakes are relatively random. If it's too close, it's sent to judicial recount, and things are looked at more closely.
This is one way to run a fair election.
I was not involved in the Ohio election, so I cannot give my professional opinion, but from what I've heard from the media, there were numerous conflicts of interest which would be illegal in Canada, and numerous other irregularities which would be illegal even in the U.S.
The database is built from Microsoft's Jet database engine
Why not just put a degaussing coil in all the door frames?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Back in 1995 I came in touch with the JET engine for the first time. It was used in a database application for a commercial aircraft carrier (!) Databases were corrupt all the times. It was obvious that the technology was a mess. At that time, much better alternatives were available for a little more $$. Hence I could not understand why anyone would spend time and money with such broken technology.
Now we see the use of this technology again, and in an application that is crucial to the future of the U.S and to the future of many other countries... the same mistakes are being made again.
But that is not the real problem. Yes, we know that electronic voting machine manufacturers have a long record of being lazy, careless, and incompetent. The actual problem is with the opinion of the decision makers in the administration and with the opinion of the public. Information technology is widely accepted as a means to make collecting, sorting, and counting, of numbers, names, addresses, etc. more reliable and more efficient. So why not use it also to collect and to count voter ballots?
There is this subtle difference between paper and electronic storage. If you write something on a paper or make a hole, then it will be very difficult and time-consuming to remove the writing or the hole. In any case, too much work to alter ballots in significant numbers! And, if you still do, you leave a trace to be discovered by the forensic experts. In contrast, the information stored on a hard disk, in a flash ram, or transferred via network, can be altered very quickly and, if done well, without leaving any trace. Hence it is by nature that electronic voting machines are insecure and unreliable.
Badly designed and badly implemented electronic voting machines just add up to the insecurity and the lack of reliability that this technology has by its virtue. On the other hand, measures like paper audit trails are certainly very helpful, but these are mere attempts to improve a technology that is bad from the outset.
Looking at people's difficulties in understanding and dealing with today's computer security threats, I guess that it will take a lot of time until the aforementioned difference is in the heads of majority of the public and of those involved in the voting process. In the meantime, we will have many more "voting machine news": For every major election where electronic voting machines will be used, there will be stories about malfunctioning machines, missing audit trails, about elections being stolen, and so on. This is the wrong approach to "strengthen the democratic tradition".
My credo is that running a democracy has a prize that is called "counting by hand".
Diebolds electronic voting division was purchased wholesale from Global Election Systems in 2002. GES produced crap back then and it is no suprise that they continued to produce crap under new management. Their incompetence shouldn't reflect poorly on the ability of the engineering staff in the ATM division, although it does say quite a bit about the top-level management.
its really stunning to think that something like voting in a democracy isn't considered mission critical to the country. ...to not consider it that way is to say that voting doesn't matter
You are incorrect on both counts.
First, if something is "mission critical" do you entrust it to people who have no idea of the necessary details, or will just use a default position to produce the end result as opposed to careful thought and analysis? No.
Perhaps you don't understand what "mission critical" means. I'll clue you in a bit. Take a look at the Space Shuttle. See those massive engines? Those are mission critical. If they fail so does the mission.
Does the country continue to operate if voting fails? Yes. Every election has had issues with voting. Every election from the beginning has had counting issues, validity of the voter issues, etc.. Yet the *Republic* marches on (though it is becoming more of a democracy - yes that's a bad thing). The troops still fight, stupid laws still get passed, political games still occur, the courts still continue functioning, ambassadors still do their jobs, the IRS still siphons the results of your work from your paycheck, the cops still arrest people, the people still work, shop, and generally live their lives, and so on.
Now that said, it does not mean voting shouldn't be taken seriously. But to say it is mission critical is to say something that isn't true.
Why do companies like Diebold not take voting seriously? The people don't. To paraphrase "K" a bit, a person may take voting seriously but the people do not. When you have a large portion of the voters who vote on "single-issue" or party-line they are not taking it seriously. When people go in and punch votes that they didn't research, they aren't taking it seriously. When people are given the choice of evils, the decision is generally not taken seriously.
The candidates and lawmakers don't take voting seriously either. If they did they wouldn't put all manner of blocks in the way of political speech. They also would not make laws to "protect" us from stupidity. They act as if we are stupid except for that short moment of casting a vote - for them. Hell look at all the accusations by the Gore-siders when Bush was elected: the other voters were stupid.
You want voting to be taken seriously? Give us a "none of the above" option. How does it work? Simple: if NOTA "wins" all who were on the ballot are barred from the next election, and it is held 90 days from the first. If NOTA still wins, the office goes vacant until the next election. Clearly nobody was able to fit the bill so nobody sits in the office. If the office goes a couple cycles w/o a victor, dissolve it wherever not constitutionally required.
Another option: Require a majority. Not just a majority of voters, but a full-on majority of citizens. Most elections (in the US at least) don't require a majority, just a plurality (yes that means less than half of the votes can still win - as Clinton did) of the votes cast. Consider the whole of the adult citizenry the body, and in order to have a solid vote mandate that votes of more than half of the citizenry are required to be voted in.
Right now if a third of those eligible vote, and half of them vote for one guy you've got about 1/6th of the population voting someone into office. Where a majority is not required, the numbers can drop down to 20% of votes cast which in the above example would mean what, 1/30th of the population?
Do the same thing for all issues in front of the voters. Bond issues, levies, tax raises, initiatives, etc..
Voting is marginalized by the government (which has a vested interest in doing so), by the voters (who do not do "due diligence"), and by the candidates (who know they don't really need a majority of people, just a plurality of those who hauled their asses down to teh voting station or sent their mail-in ballot in). Something so heavily marginalized can not be mission critical.
Yes, the
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
I posted this somewhere else, but it needs to be restated. The reason that Diebold can't get this right, is because they don't have their ATM engineers working on it. Diebold Elections Systems did not exist until 2002 when Diebold purchased Global Elections Systems. The basic software architecture (including the use of Jet) goes back to a touch screen voting system designed by iMark in 1995. In that system the database was single use - stored on a smart card, and had to be merged together later.
The purchase of GES was in response to the federal voting legislation passed after "hanging chad" issue. This legislation, while not requiring the use of electronic voting machines, including many provisions (such as requiring that people with disabilites be able to vote using the same system as everyone else) that certainly encouraged them. Diebold expected a huge increase in voting machine purchases as a result of this, and didn't have time to build their own system from scratch, so they acquired one. Thier predictions were correct and they have made a ton of money from the deal holding 80% of the market, even though their design is garbage.
Basically all these problems with voting machines are because of misguided voting reform, where after ignoring an issue for years voters turned around and demanded something be done, and the politicians happily obliged by passing knee-jerk laws and buying up whatever snake-oil was available at that minute. Which is pretty much politics in a nutshell - ignore a problem until it gets really bad and then overreact and make things worse than they were to begin with.