Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Suppresses Report On Voting Systems

Posted by kdawson on from the tell-me-but-don't-tell-them dept.

Irvu writes "A New Jersey Superior Court Judge has prohibited the release of an analysis conducted on the Sequoia AVC Advantage voting system. This report arose out of a lawsuit challenging on constitutional grounds the use of these systems. The study was conducted by Andrew Appel on behalf of the plaintiffs, after the judge in the case ordered the company to permit it. That same judge has now withheld it indefinitely from the public record on a verbal order."

14 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Wikileaks? by wraithguard01 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hmm... This looks like a job for wikileaks. Couldn't be too hard to find. Has it been posted at all? If so, could a quick google archive search prove useful? I would be very interested to see the results of this study, and would be even more interested to know this judge's reasoning behind withholding it.

    1. Re:Wikileaks? by mdmkolbe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The restraining order is temporary until arguments can be heard. If we weren't so close to the election a better strategy would be to wait and argue it in court. No need to make the judge angry or risk a contempt of court charge by leaking it.

      With it so close to the election though, those arguments may not be heard soon enough. (OTOH, it may already be to close for the report to make any difference anyway.)

    2. Re:Wikileaks? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am sure I am not the only one who thinks that the consideration here shouldn't be "what do we do about these issues, given the date of the election?" but "what do we do with the date of the election, given these issues?"

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    3. Re:Wikileaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Uh... given that this report has extremely limited distribution (the 6 people who worked on it, plus the judge and the two attorneys), if it suddenly showed up on wikileaks... well, I'll let you figure out what would happen next to Mr Appel and the court case.

    4. Re:Wikileaks? by cHiphead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Easy, you throw out the voting machines and manually tabulate votes, its real fucking easy, you have a written/typed ballot, the poll monitor records the vote on a running vote list as the votes are handed in, then the votes are hand counted later that evening, totals on the poll working tabulation are compared to hand count totals, recounts conducted as necessary.

      All handcounts are done under public video surveillance from multiple angles done by multiple sources (eg. web based camera, cspan camera, government run camera, 2 LOCAL news station cameras, and 2 national news station cameras.)

      Hows that sound? (Yeah, theres a few more details and possible steps to shore up security of the votes, but its just a first outline)

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    5. Re:Wikileaks? by try_anything · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Limiting the release of information from a court case can be appropriate. According to Appel, the judge suppressed the report after Sequoia "grossly mischaracterized" the report, which I bet means they claimed it gratuitously revealed trade secrets. If lawsuits could be used to fish for information about trade secrets, that would be very bad news for small companies trying to compete with rich ones like Microsoft and IBM.

      Hopefully the judge only suppressed the report to give herself time to examine the merit of Sequoia's claim. (Also, hopefully she rejects their claim and releases the report quickly enough to make a difference in this election.)

    6. Re:Wikileaks? by cHiphead · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not quite, the votes ARE tallied onsite, and tallied AGAIN centrally. Security of ballots should be handled by State Police and under the observation of a state judge. GPS tracking of state police trucks picking up and transferring ballots, along with physical, live video broadcasts would cover that. Its a bit excessive but it could work.

      Theres only so much one can do to protect the vote, the logistics of poll site based final ballot tallying and recounts are a real pita to manage. Nothing is going to be fullproof.

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  2. This is a job for... by TheRedSeven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sounds like the right time for WikiLeaks, if ever there was one.

  3. So... by uberlinuxguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow, first he orders the company to allow the study, then he orders the results withheld from public record. Now either the results are just that bad that it would tank the company, and honestly hasn't there been enough of that lately?

    Or somehow the company got in the judge's pocket.

    Curiouser and curiouser.....

    --
    The Uber
    http://www.tulg.org/
    http://devurandom.livejournal.com/
    1. Re:So... by devnullkac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The defendants had 30 days to review the report and make formal motions. They chose instead to make an unchallenged assertion of harm and ask for a stay without giving the plaintiffs a chance to refute the assertion. If 30 days is too short to make formal motions, the defendants should not have agreed to such a short timetable. Perhaps their intention all along was to suppress the report through "grossly mischaracteriz[ing]" it if it wasn't to their liking.

      --
      What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
  4. once again... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find myself posting this particular comment a lot in regards to voting issues...

    Strangely enough, the last armed revolt against the government in the US was in Athens, Tn. in *1946*. The cause? Voting issues...

    http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1985/2/1985_2_72.shtml [americanheritage.com]

    Not that I am advocating it, but it will be interesting to see just how PO'd folks will get...

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  5. Re:Trade Secrets by Sandbags · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The gag order is to prevent an actual hacking event. These machines are in use in places outside NJ. By making this information available to the public prior the the election he'd be virtually ensuring tat there's be a breach, especially if as we suspect it's easy to crack the system.

    This has little to do with trade secrets, which are often published, and which are protected by patents.

    --
    There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
  6. Re:this does not look good for the judge. by MadKeithV · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's great logic... Limit the exploitation of the fault to the people that put the fault there in the first place, but lets not let the other team know about it!
    If this information comes out after the election and it does turn out there was a really simple-to-exploit flaw, it should void the results of all these machines.
    I'm not holding my breath for that though (and why would I, it's none of *my* business, I'm not an American citizen.)

  7. Just wrong by mlwmohawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This country has a serious mental problem in government. "of the people, by the people, and for the people" is not just a slogan, it is supposed to be the core value of the law.

    I understand what the judge is doing, and in some circles it will be seen as a "responsible" thing to do. In a democracy, especially in a country that is supposed to be "for the people," it rings as cynical protection for an entity that actually harms "we the people" and our rights.