CIA Expert Decries E-Voting Security 178
ISoldat53 sends this quote from McClatchy DC:
"The CIA, which has been monitoring foreign countries' use of electronic voting systems, has reported apparent vote-rigging schemes in Venezuela, Macedonia and Ukraine and a raft of concerns about the machines' vulnerability to tampering. Appearing last month before a US Election Assistance Commission field hearing in Orlando, Fla., a CIA cybersecurity expert suggested that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and his allies fixed a 2004 election recount, an assertion that could further roil US relations with the Latin leader. ... Stigall said that most Web-based ballot systems had proved to be insecure. The commission has been criticized for giving states more than $1 billion to buy electronic equipment without first setting performance standards. Numerous computer-security experts have concluded that US systems can be hacked, and allegations of tampering in Ohio, Florida and other swing states have triggered a campaign to require all voting machines to produce paper audit trails."
who knows (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe next... (Score:5, Insightful)
...they should look at the electronic vote-rigging in the USA? We know the machines have misreported votes. The president/CEO of Diebold promised to literally do everything in his power to "deliver" Ohio's electoral votes to GWB. A legal recount of the paper ballots was terminated, not in the interest of the American people. Instead of spying on the electoral processes of others, perhaps we could put the effort into running our elections scrupulously.
Remember kids, its only fair if they agree with us (Score:5, Insightful)
I like how the CIA (who haven't got a great record for promoting democracy in Venezeula, seeing as they have already mounted at least one coup attempt on Chavez) are wailing about vote rigging.
They didn't seem to care this much about democratic elections when they were backing Pinochet, or the Contras, or any of the other dictators they've pushed on any Latin American country that didn't toe the line.
I used to like democracy. I always thought it was a good idea. But having seen how its most vocal proponent actually treats elections in practice, I am cynical to the point of thinking anybody who talks about democracy is only talking about their guy winning at any cost.
do they seriously expect us to believe this (Score:4, Insightful)
Shoulda got Diebold to do
'[Diebold] is "committed to helping Ohio to deliver [commondreams.org] its electoral votes to the president next year"'
Deflect attention from the beam in your own eye and trash the democratically elected leader of Venezuela cause he won't give the OIL to the US and let it sell it back to them, like the US did in Iraq.
'Election-Fraud [tomflocco.com] Website Removed Before Tuesday Recall Vote'
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/10/01/1225227.shtml?tid=123&tid=103&tid=1 [slashdot.org]
Re:Remember kids, its only fair if they agree with (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me get this straight ... (Score:4, Insightful)
The CIA, which has in the past actively worked to overthrow (and has succeeded [uchicago.edu] in overthrowing) South American regimes [wikipedia.org] the United States doesn't like, now claims that Venezuela used vote rigging to win a 2004 election recount just two years after a failed coup took place against Chavez that the United State sanctioned [guardian.co.uk].
Forgive me if I don't take this seriously.
That was I was thinking. (Score:5, Insightful)
The CIA has murdered and tortured men women and childeren (and sponsored these activities) to rig elections and make sure the party they wanted obtained power. So we are now supposed to believe them that elections could be rigged but they didn't take part in rigging them?
Perhaps they are just upset that Chavez rigged the elections better then they did?
While I have little faith in electronic voting if the CIA told me the sky was blue, I would check and then have my eyes examined for tampering just to be sure.
Re:Bigger problems than just rigging ... (Score:4, Insightful)
One thing that didn't help was the assertion by CBS (and others) in 2000 that Gore won the election before all the votes had been counted.
Another thing that didn't help was the assertion by Fox (and others) in 2000 that Bush won the election before all the votes had been counted.
Re:That was I was thinking. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not as bad as Operation Ajax [wikipedia.org]. (Joint British - American operation.) Just reading about it [mohammadmossadegh.com] makes me nauseous.
Re:who knows (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe next... (Score:1, Insightful)
I am sure they did investigate it...Probably before it happened so they'd know how to do it.
"allegations" ??? (Score:3, Insightful)
I liked the reference to "allegations of tampering" in some US elections. I mean, we're talking about elections in which people demoed their ability to train a chimp to alter the results of a voting machine and delete the log files that contained the evidence.
The use of the term "allegations" here could be viewed by the cynical as not quite what you'd call "fair and balanced" reporting. A better phrasing might probably be something like "brazen and shameless tampering". If you read the literature on the topic, you get a real feeling that the companies involved are all but thumbing their noses at the voting public.
The "hacked" machines weren't compromised due to obscure bugs that the companies quickly fixed. It's more like the hackability was based on a set of carefully designed-in features which the companies are probably bragging about during their sales pitches in the proverbial political back rooms. (Are they still smoke-filled?)
Obsession (Score:3, Insightful)
"The president/CEO of Diebold promised to literally do everything in his power to "deliver" Ohio's electoral votes to GWB."
Wow, you just can't let go, can you? Bush is out of office and you're still obsessing over him.
The Diebold guy promising to "deliver" Ohio for Bush was speaking at a party event, in the capacity as a party fundraiser and organizer, not as part of your fevered fantasies of a "right-wing coup". Despite your paranoia, the same voting systems were used to swept Democrats into power in 2006 and 2008.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Had you RTFA, you would know that the CIA is apparently claiming that the recount was rigged, and that the e-voting systems were so flawed as to make it both possible to do and impossible to determine the true votes.
Which of the other agencies at the time had the ability or inclination to examine the e-voting systems?
Are you assuming the the e-voting systems in use then were accurate and secure? If not, you just agreed with the CIA. If so, you are probably so wrong that you might as well stop now. There is little evidence to support trusting those systems, much less now than at the time of the election.
I have no reason to trust e-voting systems of any kind. Brazil's system seems to be the best of the lot.
But I didn't need the CIA's study to come to that conclusion.
Re:Obsession (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, you just can't let go, can you? Bush is out of office and you're still obsessing over him.
Wait, you are saying that just because the game is no longer on the office we should forget and let it go????? I mean, if I could apply that logic to other parts of life it would mean, for example, that I should go prosecuting a copy and unlawfully killed someone because s\he left the corporation. It is stupid and dangerous.