nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> <Quote>
> A four-year-old software glitch wiped out almost 200 votes from a
> small California county's November elections tally, causing officials
> to certify results that are now known to be incorrect.
>
> The bug, which resides in specific versions of tabulation software
> sold by Premier Election Solutions, caused 197 paper ballots to
> mysteriously vanish from Humboldt County's final vote count. The error
> only came to light after a volunteer outfit using open-source software
> and an off-the-shelf paper scanner audited the results.
>
> The botched results probably never would have come to light were it
> not for something called the Humboldt County Transparency Project,
> which passes every ballot cast through an optical scanner after it has
> been officially counted. The images are then made available online for
> anyone to view. Open source software allows users to sort ballots by
> precinct and recount tallies.
>
> The bug in GEMS is separate from one uncovered in August when Premier
> warned government officials of a critical error in its touchscreen and
> optical scanning machines. Premier fessed up to the problem after
> first blaming them on human error and bugs in anti-virus software.
> </Quote>
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/09/diebold_software_glitch/
>
> Bugs in anti-virus software? What kind of OS are they running those
> Diebold machines under?
Need you even ask?
Diebold's, eerrr, "Premier Election Solutions" run Windows throughout. And
they even seem proud of it ... For instance, their voter regsitration
system sales pitch would be hilarious if it weren't so sad:
http://www.premierelections.com/secure_solutions/voter_registration.html
"This reliable, scalable technology runs on Microsoft® Windows® and sets a
new standard for reliability and scalThis reliable, scalable technology."
Wow, "reliability" and "scalability" twice in the same sentence! Somehow
this doesn't sound at all like they have confidence in what they're
peddling. And let's face it: nothing running on Microsoft software can ever
be "reliable" or "scalable". If the foundation is crap, you can forget
about the rest of your edifice from the onset.
"The DIMS-NeT family also demonstrates how well an operating system can be
integrated with a standards-based directory, network, file and print
services, and end-to-end management."
Ah, another big boo-boo: if there's one OS where "standards" have the
clarity, reliability and usability of quicksand, Windows is it.
"This combination of reliability and functionality provides the best
foundation for integrating your county or state election department with
modern technology."
Windows is without doubt the most kludgy, un-modern technology available
today. But OK, it looks all nice and shiny, perhaps that accounts for the
qualification of "modern".
And here's some more:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/13/diebold_loses_votes_again/
"In August, Premier admitted that for 10 years its software has contained a
critical programming error that can drop votes."
Yup, a vote-dropping bug was present for /ten years/ in a machine that's
been used in over two thirds of the USA ...
Here in the Netherlands, the government has done the decent thing: they
banned voting machines after it was demonstrated that the machines could be
manipulated and people's votes could be intercepted. It's back to the good
old red pencil once again.
Richard Rasker
--
http://www.linetec.nl
|
|
