Steven Gaal Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Nat Sec Lab Hacks Diebold Touch-Screen Voting Machine by Remote Control With $26 in Computer Parts xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX= ---------------------------------------------------------------o--------------------------------------------------------= National Security Lab Hacks Diebold Touch-Screen Voting Machine by Remote Control With $26 in Computer Parts My New EXCLUSIVE at Salon Hack team leader: 'Can do similar things on pretty much every e-voting machine'... The Vulnerability Assessment Team (VAT) at the U.S. Dept. of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois has managed to hack a Diebold Accuvote touch-screen voting machine in what I describe at my exclusive today at Salon as perhaps "one of the most disturbing e-voting machine hacks to date." As noted by the computer scientists and security experts at Argonne's VAT, largely all that's needed to accomplish this hack is about $26 and an 8th grade science education. "This is a national security issue," VAT team leader Roger Johnston told me, echoing what I've been reporting other computer scientists and security experts telling me for years. "It should really be handled by the Department of Homeland Security." Johnston should know. While the VAT folks have been dabbling in the security (or lack thereof) of e-voting systems in their spare time of late, most of the work they do is related to issues like nuclear safeguards and non-proliferation. What makes this hack so troubling --- and different from those which have come before it --- is that it doesn't require any actual changes to, or even knowledge of, the voting system software or its memory card programming. It's not a cyberattack. It's a "Man-in-the-middle" attack where a tiny, $10.50 piece of electronics is inserted into the system between the voter and the main circuit board of the voting system allowing for complete control over the touch-screen system and the entire voting process along with it. Add an optional $15 radio frequency remote control device, and votes can be changed, without the knowledge of the voter, from up to half a mile away… MORE AT THE BRAD BLOG: link http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8785 FULL EXCLUSIVE AT SALON: link http://www.salon.com/news/politics/elections/2011/09/27... Read more: link http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8785 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 related ===========================ooo http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/10/sc_gop_operative_ap_story_showing_impact_of_voter_id_on_blacks_proves_exactly_why_law_is_needed.php?ref=fpblg ==============================o===============================V Ryan J. Reilly October 20, 2011, 1:50 PM 794042 Updated: Oct. 20, 3:15PM The Associated Press put out a story this week showing that South Carolina’s voter I.D. law “appears to be hitting black precincts in the state the hardest.” One person who really loved the story was Wesley Donehue, the CEO of Donehue Direct and a political strategist for the South Carolina Senate Republican Caucus, who took to Twitter to write that the story “proves EXACTLY why we need Voter ID in SC.” It wasn’t long until Donehue’s tweet was bouncing all around the progressive twittersphere. In subsequent tweets, Donehue clarified that he wasn’t talking about the fact that the story showed, for example, that “among the state’s 2,134 precincts there are 10 precincts where nearly all of the law’s affect falls on nonwhite voters who don’t have a state-issued driver’s license or ID card, a total of 1,977 voters.” Rather Donehue said the story “has proven that a bunch of non-South Carolinians are voting in SC elections. Did they vote in other states too?? FRAUD!” We just chatted with Donehue about the voter ID Twitter flap. He told us that he was involved in planning the strategy to pass the state’s voter ID law. “If you take that one tweet out of context, of course it makes me look like a racist,” Donehue told TPM. “But if you have any common sense at all and read the entire thing you’ll see what my point is.” “He was using that particular box as an example for all black boxes, and I’m saying hold up, wait, this box is different because you’ve got so many out-of-state people, and that’s why they don’t have state IDs,” Donehue said. “Now granted, they can go vote, but that’s not the point. The point is he’s using a college box — whether it be black or white — to use as an example for all black boxes, and that just doesn’t make any sense.” Donehue said he agreed that voter ID laws would likely suppress voter turnout amongst college students. “[The AP author] was saying ‘look, half of the people in this box don’t have IDs,’ and I’m just saying that’s not because they’re black, that’s because they’re not from South Carolina,” Donehue said. “Whether they’re students, black, white, it doesn’t matter: you can’t use that specific example.” Donehue said that college students “will have to prove they live in South Carolina.” “The argument is that since they live in South Carolina nine months out of the year, they should have a say in what goes on in the state,” Donehue said. “Listen, if that’s true, then become a resident of the state. If you’re going to live here nine months and have a say in what goes on in the state of South Carolina then go become a South Carolina resident and get yourself a South Carolina ID.” The Justice Department is currently reviewing South Carolina’s voter ID law to determine whether it is discriminatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share Posted November 9, 2011 ==================================== related link http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x518172 ---------------------------------------------o------------------------- Phillipsburg man discovers voting machine error - UPDATE Published: Tuesday, November 08, 2011, 11:53 AM Richard Rumfield was the first person to cast his vote at 6 o'clock this morning at the town municipal building in Phillipsburg. But as he was about to submit his choices, he realized an error with the machine. Rather than choosing the names he checked on his straight ticket, the machine had compiled the names listed below his preferred candidates. Rumfield alerted a poll worker, who noted the error and said they'd report the malfunctioning machine. By going back through each question, and answering opposite of what he had the first time, Rumfield was able to manually choose the candidates for whom he actually wanted to vote, but he said he still left the polling place unsatisfied. "Suppose there's other machines in the town or Warren County that are rigged," he said. "This machine should have been checked out before anyone was even voting on it." Bill Duffy, administrator and chief clerk for the Warren County Board of Elections, said the machines were calibrated in early October, but it's not uncommon for them to have trouble on Election Day. "There's always one or two that just give us a problem," he said. More: link http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/elections/index.ssf/201... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted November 28, 2011 Author Share Posted November 28, 2011 ==================================== related link http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x518172 ---------------------------------------------o------------------------- Phillipsburg man discovers voting machine error - UPDATE Published: Tuesday, November 08, 2011, 11:53 AM Richard Rumfield was the first person to cast his vote at 6 o'clock this morning at the town municipal building in Phillipsburg. But as he was about to submit his choices, he realized an error with the machine. Rather than choosing the names he checked on his straight ticket, the machine had compiled the names listed below his preferred candidates. Rumfield alerted a poll worker, who noted the error and said they'd report the malfunctioning machine. By going back through each question, and answering opposite of what he had the first time, Rumfield was able to manually choose the candidates for whom he actually wanted to vote, but he said he still left the polling place unsatisfied. "Suppose there's other machines in the town or Warren County that are rigged," he said. "This machine should have been checked out before anyone was even voting on it." Bill Duffy, administrator and chief clerk for the Warren County Board of Elections, said the machines were calibrated in early October, but it's not uncommon for them to have trouble on Election Day. "There's always one or two that just give us a problem," he said. More: link http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/elections/index.ssf/201... XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXvvvvXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXo -------------------------------------------------------------------o Paper Ballot Election Results Flip in UT After 'Recount' Finds Original Tally 'Extremely' Wrong (X link http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x518202 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now