Diebold issued a press release and is picked up by Yahoo News

[Robbien]

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030819/phtu023_1.html

MCKINNEY, Texas, Aug. 19 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Diebold Election Systems is shocked and disappointed by recent admissions from the Johns Hopkins associate professor Avi Rubin, co-author of a recent report claiming security flaws with Diebold Election Systems software. Mr. Rubin revealed that, at the time he participated in the study, he held a financial interest and a position on the advisory board of VoteHere Inc., which is a Diebold competitor in electronic elections technology (http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/home03/aug03/votehere.html). Mr. Rubin provided further background by acknowledging that he is known in the field for his position "as a strong skeptic about whether there is any viability in known for suggesting that there are very difficult problems for any company to overcome."

Diebold Election Systems has consistently questioned the conclusions drawn by the Johns Hopkins-issued report. In the study, a prior version of Diebold's touch screen software was analyzed while it was running on a device on which it was never intended to run, on an operating system for which it was not designed, and with minimal knowledge of the overall structures and processes in which the terminal software is embedded. In addition, many of the weaknesses attributed to the operating system on which the software was tested are inapplicable to the embedded operating system actually used by Diebold. As a result, many of the conclusions drawn by the researchers are inaccurate or incomplete with respect to the security of the software element of Diebold's voting system. It is now clear, by Mr. Rubin's own admission, that questions of bias must be considered.

[librechik]

1. shit

couldn't have happened at a worse time. Dr Rubin, why didn't you say up front you have connections to a competing company, and allow the other people on your team (if un-encumbered with conflicts) take the lead?

We can't afford to give these people an inch of high ground to stand on. damn.

[arcane1]

2. fine, they can just open their code to scrutiny

and we can ALL decide!!

not bloody likely, is it?

[cybildisobedience]

3. oh, THEY'RE shocked and disappointed?

What did they think WE were when we found out that we no longer have free elections, and that scumbags like the racist pigs in Georgia who won in a crooked election could now commandeer that entire state?
So, NOW they want to talk to the press?
Fine - let's get it all out in the open. Let's open the whole stinking mess to outside, objective scrutiny. They run and hide when all this stuff is coming out, and they come out of their hole to say they're shocked and disappointed?

[Brian Sweat]

4. Argumentum Ad Hominem

[CatWoman]

5. McKinney, Texas??

:shrug:

[BevHarris]

6. Black Box Voting issued press release and it's all over the news

In fact, Georgia was covering this even before our press release arrived.

Just went out:

BULLETIN: Election put up for sale on E-Bay? New Diebold snafu in Georgia...

- Georgia governor puts secretary of state in hot seat over voting machines
- Election put up for sale on E-Bay

CONTAINED IN THIS BULLETIN:
1. Governor puts Secretary of State on hot seat over voting machines
2. Were Diebold machines certified by smoke signals? Sign language? Documents go missing. . .
3. Ohio may ask counties to buy uncertified Diebold system
4. New Diebold TSx system may be easier to hack than ever
5. Election put up for sale on E-Bay
6. Sonny Perdue centerfold in Diebold parody ad in August Hustler magazine
7. Diebold documents indicate few changes in new system - Were Hopkins flaws fixed at all?
8. Voting machine evaluator SAIC has financial ties to electronic voting industry

AUG 19 2003 - According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Governor Sonny Perdue called for an investigation of charges that Georgia's $54 million system of Diebold voting machines is vulnerable to tampering. "If turn out to be not reliable or can be tampered with, then they're -- frankly -- useless junk," he said.

In Atlanta on Monday, Secretary of State Cathy Cox expressed "total confidence in Georgia's new electronic platforms." The governor said he would ask Cox, a Democrat often mentioned as a candidate for governor in 2006, to re-examine the system.

Last month, a study released by Johns Hopkins University computer researchers cited "significant security flaws" in the system designed by Diebold Election Systems and used in Georgia and 18 other states.

Diebold, who has nearly a quarter of a billion dollars at stake in three key sales ($53m,Maryland, $31m,San Diego and $150m,Ohio) and election officials (who know diddly about computer security issues like wireless remote access but can explain that poll workers are trained to stand “watch” over the machines) have disagreed with the Hopkins study. To date several Diebold public relations people, but no Diebold programmers, have vouched for the system.

RELATED NEWS:

2. DID GEORGIA CERTIFY DIEBOLD WITH SMOKE SIGNALS? SIGN LANGUAGE? A PSYCHIC HOTLINE?

Certification documents remain at large for 22,000 machines. That's right, Georgia doesn't seem to be able to locate the certification letter for the Diebold machines. Wait -- new answer -- they just announced they are not sure what is meant by "certification" documents.

Diebold and its proponents point to the certification process as proof of their honesty, in lieu of allowing public examination of its source code.

On March 19, 2003 a Georgia citizen filed an Open Records Act request for a copy of the certification letter from the lab (certifying the version of the Diebold software which was used on election day) and received this reply:

Clifford D. Tatum - Assistant Director of Legal Affairs - Election Division

"In response to your second category, we have determined that no records exist in the Secretary of State's office regarding a certification letter from the lab certifying the version of software used on Election Day.

On, August 6, 2003, the Georgia Libertarian Party asked for the written certification documents pertaining to all Diebold voting systems used in recent elections, including the version numbers of the software."

Reply: from Gary Powell

”While I am not sure what you mean by the words ‘please provide written certification documents,’ GTA does have the official procurement file for the procurement which is the subject of your request.

Are we speaking in tongues? A foreign language?” Is it so hard to understand that we'd like to see the certification letter for Georgia?”

Georgia law clearly requires certification documents; for a copy of the applicable law, please scroll down on http://www.blackboxvoting.org.

3. AND WHILE WE ARE SPEAKING OF CERTIFICATION (OR LACK OF): OHIO may ask counties to purchase an uncertified Diebold system. According to an article in the Cleveland Plain Dealer by Julie Carr-Smyth, Diebold has decided to sell its new TSx touch screen system to Ohio. Problem is, the counties must buy the machines in four weeks. No worries, Diebold says it hopes it will have it certified in 4-5 weeks. (Huh?)

4. AND ON THE TOPIC OF SELLING NEW SYSTEMS: THE NEW DIEBOLD SYSTEM MAY BE EASIER TO HACK THAN EVER. According to an article in the Akron Beacon Journal (http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/6538203.htm) by Erika D. Smith, with the new TSx system, Diebold is switching to WIRELESS transmission of the voting data. Understand the implications of hacking during transmission of the vote: You can overwrite the ORIGINAL VOTES in the precinct this way, destroying the value of the memory card as a backup system.

Smith, a tech writer, asked Diebold about the risk of hacking the new wireless transmission system. Diebold did not deny that it could happen. No worry, says Mark G. Radtke of Diebold -- hackers wouldn't get the official results, only the unofficial results. It takes several days to make the results official, he says.

And to make results official they do what? They look at the memory card (which can be hacked during the wireless transmission) and/or the GEMS database (which can be hacked during the wireless transmission). (In fact a hacker could hit both at the same time, during the upload). Do we feel secure now?

5. ELECTION FOR SALE ON E-BAY: The 2004 presidential election was put up for auction on E-Bay, with the asking bid set at $99,999,999.99. The election-for-sale had received 17 bids before it
was shut down by E-Bay, and not all bidders were satisfied. “I tried to bid, but my $100 million bid freaked out their software,” reports Karl Schneider.

The auction lasted three days before E-Bay removed it; its original web address was
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3622585798&category=367 -- the page has since been replaced by “Rob” who says he was the one who tried to auction off the presidential election, at: http://rawb.rh.rit.edu/tempDL/eBayStuff.html.

“I'm just a college kid. I don't know my left from my right, whether right-left or politics,” says Rob.

6. SONNY PERDUE THE CENTERFOLD ON LARRY FLYNT AD PARODY:
http://www.larryflynt.com/ad_parodies_gallery/source/vote-machine-parody.htm
Perhaps Perdue didn’t appreciate being featured in the August issue of Hustler Magazine…

7. More on Diebold: One of the folders found on the now infamous Diebold web site was labeled "final certification" documents for the new TSx system. In these documents is the very interesting statement under "change log," stating that Diebold DID NOT SUBMIT a change log because the system is based on a previous submission.

So...were there changes, since the security flaws were exposed by the Hopkins team, or weren't there? In fact, has Diebold ever produced a lick of evidence that they changed a goll-durn thing to remedy the flaws found in the Hopkins report?

8. Ohio delays decision to pick voting machine vendor, until defense contractor SAIC gives Diebold a clean bill of health. The selection of the SAIC by Maryland and Ohio to evaluate the voting machines is a curious one. The SAIC has not one, not two, but THREE ties to the electronic voting industry:

1) Built voting machines for Diversified Dynamics
2) Marketed electronic voter registration system
3) Two former directors of SAIC are now directors of VoteHere, a voting machine company.

BONUS NEWS BYTE

9. Where's Bob? Bob Urosevich developed the architecture of the Diebold software, and has been running Diebold Election Systems for some years now. Haven't heard hide nor hair of him lately. Urosevich always comes into news interviews as the President of Diebold Election Systems, but as of the end of July, it seems someone else is using that title. Meet Tom Swidarski, President of Diebold Election Systems. Not a peep anywhere in the news media about where Bob is.

A Black Box activist called Urosevich’s office and spoke with his assistant. Urosevich is still working for the company, she assured him, and no, he has not changed positions. If this is true, does Diebold Election Systems have two people named “President” now?

# # # # #

[BevHarris]

7. By the way, I would like to thank the DUer/BBVer who called Urosevich

I so badly wanted to provide the list with his screen name, but won't unless he gives permission. But if you're watching, jump in and let us know who you are...because I appreciated it.

Bev

[Andy_Stephenson]

13. I don't think he would mind Bev....

in fact I am sure of it.

[BevHarris]

14. Thank you for calling Urosevich, God Bush n Cheney

And for documenting it the way you did.

(It was GB&C)

Bev

[Andy_Stephenson]

15. I was finally able to get the full transcript

on my laptop and will be sending it to you shortly.

[Andy_Stephenson]

16. Bev check your e-mail

and let me know if you got it ok.

Gbnc

[BevHarris]

17. Check your PM here ASAP

quick quick.

Bev

[Andy_Stephenson]

18. Nada

there....you type slow young lady.

[BevHarris]

20. Nothing in my email (from you)

maybe you can resend?

perhaps it got waylayed.

Bev

[Robbien]

19. Bev check your pm, some how I got caught in the cross fire. n/t

[Eloriel]

12. Well here it is.

I've been looking all over for this post. I thought it was its own thread.

Eloriel

[RedEagle]

21. Check.......mate?

1) Built voting machines for Diversified Dynamics
2) Marketed electronic voter registration system

****3) Two former directors of SAIC are now directors of VoteHere, a voting machine company.*****


OK, Rubin can't be an advisor who was supposedly never contacted and he's asked the university to check into things....

but...

It's OK to have a company with former Directors of SAIC, now directors of VoteHere do a review....

Wait- that's 2 to 1

I think SAIC (or Diebold) wins the hypocracy game!


:nopity:

[althecat]

8. Bev's Latest.... Kick.... n/t

[althecat]

9. Scoop Links To Bev's Latest and a new piece from Lyn Landes

BULLETIN: Election put up for sale on E-Bay? New Diebold snafu in Georgia...
By Bev Harris
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0308/S00144.htm

and

Voting Machine Fiasco: SAIC, VoteHere and Diebold
(Avi Rubin's statement)
by Lynn Landes (8/18/03)
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0308/S00145.htm

[gristy]

10. The problem of Rubin's conflict of interest will fade

IMO. This was discussed here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=198992

Bev's awesome press release will swamp this "Rubin controversy".

Diebold is grasping at straws. They have sunk to attacking the messenger, as that is all they have. And it is a very weak attack, at that.

[revcarol]

11. And now, about that Cal Tech study that DIDN'T

have Mr. Rubin on board.Didja think I would fegit, didja?

[Cocoa]

22. the conflict is real

it's a bona fide controversy, a much more direct conflict than Chuck Hagel's, imo.

[BevHarris]

23. Agreed that it is a conflict, but SAIC trumps it and Hagel's is bigger

I also think that Rubin's situation (inactive technical advisory) will get much, much more press than the SAIC active conflicts of interest (making voting machines, bed-hopping directors). That's just the breaks nowadays.

You're wrong about the Hagel conflict. Rubin had a nonparticipatory thing from two years ago; Hagel got his job based on machines that counted his votes which he had direct access to and he oversaw the programmers and other staff. That doesn't say he cheated, it says he had a whopper of a conflict of interest.

Now, let's look at more conflicts of interest: Is it true that R. Doug Lewis's business took four $10,000 contributions from Sequoia in a single year? Who paid for Cathy Cox's travel expenses when she was on junkets extolling the virtues of electronic voting machines, was that Georgia or a voting machine company? Did she accept contributions from any voting machine manufacturer? What about the $100,000 from the state of Georgia that Brit Williams is apparently getting for running classes on Diebold machines (and he's now signed up with what, four other states? What's he getting from them? How the hell do you take money like that when you are the official examiner?)

This can play out two ways. (1) It can focus on replicating the study done by Rubin et. al, because independent corroboration by a new team of researchers will trump a conflict from one member of the four original researchers or (2) It can go full-tilt at documenting every nickel every one of the players election officials have collected.

If the way it plays out is to chase Avi Rubin, we'll play our hand by demanding full disclosure from Dr. Brit Wiliams, R. Doug Lewis, Cathy Cox and all the other players.

Either way, we'll win.

Bev Harris

[BevHarris]

24. Correction: This may just blow over

AP wire story just hit, and that's the one most media picks up. It's pretty benign.

Bev

[Robbien]

25. Yes it was, but look at the hack job ajc.com did on it

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0803/20voting.html

with a quote from:

Georgia Secretary of State Cathy Cox, who oversaw the state's transition to touch-screen voting, said Rubin's failure to disclose his "overt conflict" was "simply outrageous."

Cox said Johns Hopkins should not have allowed the research to be published under its name "without regard to or review of such conflicts." Cox's office had questioned the study since its release.

[BevHarris]

26. AJC, on the bias scale, is a 9 on a scale of 1:10

The main one I was worried about was AP wire, because that gets picked up by about a hundred major media outlets. AP's story did little damage.

I cannot tell you how inept Diebold's PR department is. It never fails to surprise me. There is much they could have done to propagate that story effectively, but AP was a very important part of that, and so was Washington Post,and so was timing, and they did not score with any of those three.

They'll pick up the AJC, of course, and a few other Georgia outlets. Remains to be seen what they'll get out of the NY Times. This isn't the type of story you can get on broadcast media very well, so all they are left with is a smattering of print media in Georgia, Maryland and Ohio.

This, but then Tuesday morning, TV in Georgia was broadcasting reports every half hour about Gov. Perdue putting Cox on the hot seat. Had Diebold PR not fumbled so badly, I had something that would have been on editors desks this morning, but I figured, why bother? Wasn't even needed, so I am saving it for later.

Bev

[loudsue]

27. We have to keep the pressure on, and call them on their hypocrisy

Agreed: Rubin may have a slight conflict....on the other hand, paid Diebold elected enablers are stealing elections, covering up, and taking money from Diebold when they're supposed to be watch-dogs. That is plain ILLEGAL!! "Conflict of interest" isn't even part of what's necessary for the argument. "Fraud" comes to mind....


Great big ole kickity kick for the noon crowd....

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick: