[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

NEWS about the "plans" for November 2006 security changes.

Read about the “plans” for November 2006 security changes.

 

 

Al Kolwicz

CAMBER – Citizens for Accurate Mail Ballot Election Results

2867 Tincup Circle

Boulder, CO 80305

303-494-1540

AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx

www.users.qwest.net/~alkolwicz

www.coloradovoter.blogspot.com

 

CAMBER is a dedicated group of volunteers who are working to ensure that every voter gets to vote once, every vote is counted once, and that every ballot is secure and anonymous.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- Begin Message ---
 
 
 
Article Last Updated: 9/27/2006 11:52 PM
denver & the west
Security added for voting
Video surveillance of machines, background checks on movers included. The new rules by the secretary of state come in response to a lawsuit claiming electronic ballots are open to error and fraud.
By Katy Human
Denver Post Staff Writer
DenverPost.com

Colorado counties must now meet new, detailed security rules issued Wednesday for computerized voting.

The rules, announced by Secretary of State Gigi Dennis, call for steps such as video surveillance of machine storage areas and background checks on those transporting the election equipment.

The rules come in response to a lawsuit alleging that the state illegally certified four brands of computerized voting machines that are vulnerable to error and fraud or do not meet state disability standards.

Denver District Judge Lawrence Manzanares ruled last week that the state's certification process for the machines was "abysmal."

In 11 pages of small text, state officials set out a long list of security requirements, including limits on how many employees can enter election work areas and how often computer passwords are to be changed.

"The length and complexity of the rules demonstrates how badly the system is broken," said Paul Hultin, an attorney for the 13 citizen plaintiffs in the voting-machine lawsuit.

Manzanares ordered that the electronic machines be recertified after the Nov. 7 election.

For this election, Manzanares ordered the state and the plaintiffs to agree to an improved security plan to compensate for possible vulnerabilities of the electronic machines.

County clerks contacted said they will need time to review the new rules but probably will not need to make substantial or costly changes.

"There don't seem to be any surprises, and it seems like we're doing all of this," said Carole Murray, Douglas County's clerk and recorder.

Nancy Doty, Arapahoe County's clerk and recorder, said, "I really feel very confident in our security plan already in place."

The new security requirements also call for the secretary of state to conduct random inspections of county maintenance records.

While the rules will require additional staff time and resources, Dennis said, "We believe there's no cost that's too much to ensure democracy."

A review of security plans filed by five metro counties with the secretary of state this year revealed inconsistencies.

Adams County's security plan took up 11 pages; Douglas County's took up only a portion of one. Denver election officials said their plan is 20 pages long but declined to release it.

Only Adams County already requires Colorado Bureau of Investigation background checks on any private moving-company drivers hired to transport voting equipment.

Denver election officials said they're already moving to improve election security.

In June, staff with the city auditor's office toured the Denver warehouse where the city's computerized voting machines are stored.

The inside temperature was about 100 degrees, and at least four doors were opened for fresh air, said Denis Berckefeldt, spokesman for City Auditor Dennis Gallagher.

There was only one guard, Berckefeldt said.

"There is no security to speak of out there," he said.

The warehouse now has a cooling system, said Alton Dillard, spokesman for the Denver Election Commission.

There are security cameras and a burglar alarm, he wrote in an e-mail.

Dillard declined to discuss security in detail.

Staff writer Katy Human can be reached at 303-954-1910 or khuman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

Attachment: 0.dat
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
 
 
  
Article Last Updated: 9/25/2006 07:08 PM
editorial
Trust in machines is hard to come by
A judge rules that the secretary of state's office botched the certification of Colorado's new voting machines, but he's right to allow their use.

DenverPost.com

Squeezed by the calendar, Denver District Judge Lawrence Manzanares made the only call possible last week in ruling that the Nov. 7 election should go forward with electronic voting machines that were used in the August primary.

A group of Colorado citizens, backed by a California-based organization that has challenged new voting machines in other states as well, had asked Manzanares to ban use of four types of voting machines that had been certified by the state.

The alternative - rushing additional paper ballots to press, training election judges and putting ballot-scanning machines in place - carried too high a risk at this late date of throwing the election into chaos. The judge also noted that it was too late to devise new security standards and retest the electronic machines, which will be used in every county. Manzanares found that the secretary of state's office had failed to properly certify the machines and ordered a whole new certification be done after the November election.

The fact that Secretary of State Gigi Dennis and her staff failed at what should have been their most important assignment this year is sobering, and has left the state's voters in an uncomfortable position. It should be a top priority for the new secretary of state - Republican Mike Coffman and Democrat Ken Gordon are vying for the job - to ensure the security of voting systems and restore citizen confidence.

Manzanares acknowledged that the machines' software might be vulnerable to tampering and ordered the state to immediately draft detailed rules for counties to follow to ensure the machines are kept secure. The secretary of state's spokeswoman, Dana Williams, said the plans were completed Monday and submitted to the plaintiffs' lawyers. The judge is to rule on them today.

Use of the new machines was driven by a federal law designed to restore voter confidence after the problems of the 2000 presidential election. Instead, the certification problems in Colorado may have had the opposite effect.

Voters who don't want to think twice about the machines have the option, and plenty of time, to vote by mail. Voters can request absentee ballots by Oct. 27 if they want ballots mailed to them, and can pick them up in person as late as Nov. 3. If you mail your ballot back, allow enough time for it to be received by Election Day, Nov. 7. An absentee ballot also can be returned in person to the clerk's office in your county by 7 p.m. on Election Day. And remember, Coloradans who haven't registered to vote in the November election are facing an Oct. 10 deadline, just two weeks from today.

Attachment: 0.dat
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

 

Article Last Updated: 9/25/2006 07:10 PM

 

ed quillen | columnist

A surefire election forecast

 

By Ed Quillen
Denver Post Columnist
DenverPost.com

 

Here is a safe prediction for this year's general election: If any contest is remotely close, there will be litigation about the accuracy of the vote.

Indeed, there already has been litigation. Denver District Judge Lawrence Manzares ruled last week that the electronic voting machines to be used in this election do not comply with the security procedures required by state law. Even so, he declared, to switch to another voting method now, just six weeks before the election, "would create more problems than it would solve."

No voting system is perfect, including the traditional paper ballot. In my days as editor of the Breckenridge newspaper, nearly 30 years ago, I occasionally drank lunch with an attorney who had many years under his belt. He had been quite active in precinct-level machine politics during his youth, he said, and he once reminisced about how "the damn Republicans in North Denver used such soft lead pencils that it was really hard to erase their votes and fix their ballots."

But at least there's some physical evidence of tampering with paper ballots. (For these electronic wonders, you might find something educational at http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting.)

Edward W. Felton, a professor of computer science at Princeton University, as well as a few of his students, arranged to get a Diebold Accuvote machine. It might tell you something that Diebold refused to supply a machine for their investigation, and so they had to go through a third party.

The Accuvote is a small computer that runs off a memory card which stores its program and data. It is inside a locked compartment.

The researchers found that the key to the locked compartment is a common type - one from a hotel mini-bar could open the machine. Even without the key, one student could pick the lock in 10 seconds. Or just remove some screws and open the machine from the back.

The old memory card can then be pulled out and replaced with one with malicious software. Reboot the machine, then put the original memory card back in place, with the malicious software still controlling the machine. This can be done in a minute or less.

What does the malicious software do? Every so often, three or four times a minute, it checks the vote tally, then adjusts vote totals to reach its programmed goals. It also makes the same changes in the backup file. There's no way to detect these changes because the total number of votes matches the total number of voters, and at the end of the election, the program erases itself.

It might be noteworthy that these machines use the "CE" variety of Microsoft Windows as their operating system, and that very few geeks can say "Windows" and "security" in the same sentence with a straight face.

Diebold argues that the machine the researchers used has "old security software." But Diebold did not make a current version available for testing, and the "old security software" was federally certified.

And that, alas, is basically the argument that our chief Colorado elections official, Secretary of State Gigi Dennis, uses: The machines are federally certified, so we ought to trust them.

Whatever electronic device I used in the meaningless primary here last month was not from Diebold. But it was still hard to trust, because I was supposed to get a Democratic ballot for Chaffee County Precinct 2, and instead I was presented with a Republican ballot for Precinct 15. After I told the nearby judge about the wrong ballot, I got the right one - but this does not instill confidence in the system, since there was nothing to stop me from casting a ballot I was not entitled to cast.

So we face an election where a Colorado judge has said the state did an "abysmal" job of testing and certification. It has been demonstrated that it's quite possible to hack at least one brand of voting machine to have it produce whatever results the hacker desires.

This comes as no surprise to my high-tech friends who are programmers, technicians and administrators. As one of them told me, "The more you know about computers, the less you trust them."

So, unless every contest is a landslide this fall, look for a lot of litigation based on the voting machinery.

Ed Quillen of Salida (ed@xxxxxxxxxx) is a former newspaper editor whose column appears Tuesday and Sunday.

 

 

 

Attachment: 0.dat
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Title: Rocky Mountain News: Elections
 
 
Rocky Mountain News
 
 
Security tightened for voting machines

Secretary of state issues procedures but draws criticism

By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News
September 28, 2006

Secretary of State Gigi Dennis on Wednesday issued new security rules for computerized voting in the November election, under orders from a judge concerned about possible tampering.

The new rules include a tight chain of custody for the machines. Multiple numbered security seals will be used, and if the seals are broken, election officials must double- check that the machines are reliable, or pull them from use.

Paul Hultin, attorney for the plaintiffs in a lawsuit that tried to have the machines banned from the upcoming vote in Colorado, was not impressed.

"What we've done is put a lot of duct tape on the Titanic," he said.

Responded Dennis: "These security plans will be the strongest in the nation. Ninety percent of the recommendations came from the suggested documents that Mr. Hultin provided. If he's not happy with it, shame on him."

The equipment has been questioned because voters cast ballots on a computer touch-screen, and totals are kept electronically. However, most machines in Colorado keep a printout of ballots as a backup.

Testimony in the trial showed experts had been able to reprogram one type of machine to distort the totals in just one minute of access.

Denver District Judge Lawrence Manzanares ruled last week that Dennis' office had failed to sufficiently test the machines, but he said it was too late to ban them. He ordered the state and the plaintiffs to jointly write tighter security rules.

The new rules also call for full audits if security seals are disrupted. Officials must check printouts, if available, or check electronic records in machines without printers. Two election judges must check to make sure the seals are intact at every stage of transport, voting and counting.

Background checks will be required for key election personnel and for vendors' repair staff who work at the county level.

Counties will be barred from connecting the machines to the Internet, which plaintiffs' experts said was too vulnerable to hacking.

Dennis said that El Paso County, which allows election judges to take voting machines home the night before an election, may continue to do so. El Paso meets the new rules because the equipment is kept in heavy canvas bags with seals, which are checked by other election judges when they leave headquarters and arrive at the polling place.

Election judges are to be given training in detecting tampering and suspicious behavior.

One rule addressed the judge's concern that the ballot printouts, which are on thermal paper like gas- pump receipts, could be damaged by exposure to heat, light and moisture during the 25 months they must be kept after the election. The rule says the printouts must be stored at 50 to 80 degrees and less than 80 percent humidity.

But some manufacturers call for more rigorous conditions. Arapahoe County, for example, uses paper that the manufacturer recommends be kept at a humidity between 45 and 65 percent to keep it in good condition for seven years after printing.

Meanwhile, a bill was introduced Wednesday in Congress to require paper ballots at every polling place.

Dennis called that move "purely political" and predicted nothing would pass Congress before the election.

Voting by mail

Who: Any registered voter can request a mail, or absentee, ballot.

When: The deadline for registering to vote is Oct. 10. The deadline for requesting an absentee or mail ballot is Oct. 31 if receiving by mail or Nov. 3 if picking up in person from the county elections department. Ballots must be returned by 7 p.m. on Election Day, Nov. 7.

Where: You can return the ballot by mail, but you must leave time for the post office to deliver it by Election Day.

More details: Call your county clerk. Or for basic questions on when, where and how to vote, consult a nonpartisan group called FairVoteColorado at or 1-888-839-4301.Source: State Rules, As Explained By The Jefferson County Elections Department, And Fairvotecolorado.

or 303-954-5438

Copyright 2006, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.


--- End Message ---