Smartmatic

[Tom]

The US Congress and president are gung ho to protect us from off shore betting establishments, yet they are using Smartmatic voting machines to elect our government. Theses machines, of murky ownership by off shore entities, have no capability to be verified or audited, and have already proven to be suspect in Venezalia.


9-5 the results of this election are going to suspicious at least.
Gotta agree with Sec on this one - no way in hell e machines are ready to be used.

[bigmack]

LouD on the sub

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-s9PkuiIw2Q

[GameTheory]

I already voted thanks to "early voting" here in Colorado. I think it was one of these machines -- looks the same. As far as being verifiable, it does print out a paper copy of your ballet (on a roll like a big receipt) which is stored in the machine. So manual counts should be possible...

[PaceAdvantage]

I don't understand this "not verifiable - no audit" claim. Is that for real? How can that possibly be, and can anyone provide a link explaining this claim?

[Secretariat]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061030/ap_on_go_ot/voting_machines_probe

Voting machine firms confirm U.S. probe
By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer Sun Oct 29, 8:18 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A U.S. manufacturer of touch-screen voting machines confirmed Sunday it was being investigated by the federal government for alleged ties to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez but flatly denied any connection.

Sequoia Voting Systems Inc., based in Oakland, Calif., said the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, was conducting the formal inquiry into it as well as its parent software company, the Smartmatic Corp., at the firms' request after news articles suggested improper ties.
The inquiry was focusing on last year's acquisition of Sequoia by Boca Raton, Fla.-based Smartmatic, which is owned by three Venezuelans, and whether Chavez's leftist government has any influence over their operations.

Chavez is a longtime foe of the Bush administration who drew criticism from lawmakers of both U.S. parties last month after he called President Bush "the devil" in a speech at the United Nations.

"Sequoia and Smartmatic are not connected, owned or controlled by the Venezuelan government whatsoever," Jeff Bialos, a Washington attorney representing the two firms, said in a telephone interview.
"There's no basis for the allegations. We were trying to prove a negative, so the two companies voluntarily submitted a notice asking CFIUS to review the acquisition to put to rest the press allegations," he said.

….

I don’t know if these below are Smartmatic machines or Diebold.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/state/15869924.htm

The problem is you’ve got links to Chavez with these Smartmatic machines. You’ve got links to Chuck Hagel on the Diebold machines. This is not good either way.

Why can’t we get this right? If the government is prohibited from examining the programming code it is ridiculous. If there is no audit trail it is ridiculous.

Let the RNC hire a few exceptional programmers to QA it, AND let the DNC hire a few exceptional programmers to QA it. Put them BOTH under contract with severe penalties for releasing proprietary information, and get both parties to sign off on the acceptability of the machines. WHY is this such a problem? The process of counting votes is not rocket science. Most horseracing software programs can do more. Why can an ATM almost always get it right, and yet these machines which simply add 1+1 seem like such a mystery?

If the RNC and DNC signed off on these machines it would go a long way to alleviating all this suspicion. Minimally, there needs to be a paper trail in the event of power failure, a court ordered recount. I still think there woudl be a potential for fraud within that, but it's a start. When there are questions about the legitimacy of elections you will always have division.

[PaceAdvantage]

What do you mean there is "no audit trail?"

In my mind, that is impossible. Please, show me the proof of this claim....anywhere....a link...an article...anything that proves without a doubt that there is no "audit trail" on any electronic voting machines used thus far in any US election.

I don't buy it, but then again, I am completely ignorant on the subject....enlighten me with a link....I know you can....

[Secretariat]

What do you mean there is "no audit trail?"

In my mind, that is impossible. Please, show me the proof of this claim....anywhere....a link...an article...anything that proves without a doubt that there is no "audit trail" on any electronic voting machines used thus far in any US election.

I don't buy it, but then again, I am completely ignorant on the subject....enlighten me with a link....I know you can....

This is a very complete article. I've bolded the audit trail info.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/06/05/election_security_2006.php

“Last month, The New York Times and other news media reported on a new security glitch uncovered in election equipment manufacturer Diebold Election System’s ATM-like touch-screen voting machines. Voting technology experts have called it the "worst security flaw ever"—any person with basic knowledge and a minute or two of access to a Diebold touch screen could load virtually any software into the machine and disable it, redistribute votes or alter its performance in myriad ways without being detected.

"This [security flaw] is worse than any of the others I've seen. It's more fundamental," said Douglas Jones, a University of Iowa computer scientist and veteran voting system examiner for the state of Iowa. "In the other ones, we've been arguing about the security of the locks on the front door. Now we find that there's no back door.”

Incredibly, media reports withheld some details of the vulnerability at the request of elections officials and scientists, partly because exploiting the security hole is so easy that providing details would give a roadmap to a potential hacker.

Elections officials in several states scrambled to limit the risk. In Pennsylvania, respected state elections chief Michael Shamos, previously a supporter of touch-screen voting, ordered the sequestering of all Diebold touch-screens. California and other states invoked emergency procedures. Meanwhile, problems with voting equipment sold by Diebold's main competitors, Sequoia Voting Systems and Election Systems and Software, popped up in numerous states, including Oregon, Texas, Colorado, Illinois, Florida, New Jersey, Washington and New Mexico.

Election Data Services estimates that, while some states are still in the process of buying voting equipment, touch-screen machines will be used by 34 percent of counties in 2006, up from 10 percent in 2000. But only seven states will use devices that print a paper receipt of electronic votes from touch-screen machines—known as a “voter verified paper audit trail” or VVPAT—with more than a dozen states still pushing legislation to require paper records. This trend is extremely worrying to election security advocates. Some cause for comfort is that 50.2 percent of counties will use optical-scan machines that read hand-marked paper ballots (up from 41 percent in the 2000 election), since at least optical scan systems have a VVPAT—a paper ballot that was marked with a pen before being scanned by the machine.

[PaceAdvantage]

I still don't see where it claims there is no audit trail. Claiming that there is no audit trail is being intellectually dishonest at best.

[GameTheory]

Well, I guess I'm in one of the seven states. I voted on the touch-screen and then you get to review everything on-screen. Then it prints the whole thing out and you review the print-out. (The print out is on a roll behind a piece of glass.) You can still change it at this point. Then you give the OK, and it casts the ballot (and the print-out scrolls out of view). If you just pressed the touch-screen and didn't get to see any print-out I could see why that would raise questions. But if there is no random sampling to see if the print outs match up with the ballots actually cast then the hard copy is giving a false sense of integrity anyway.

It all worked fine, but they did have problems with these machines during the primaries here in Denver -- software and power glitches where they couldn't get some of them up and running and no one around with training to fix them. (They say everyone is trained now.) We'll see what happens on Nov. 7th. I'm sure some sites will have problems -- can you imagine there not being technical problems with setting up hundreds/thousands of what are essentially laptop computers (with printers) and then having people line up to jab at them with their fingers? It is just a question of how they are going to deal with the inevitable problems, if they have enough technicians, etc. And who are the technicians? It is a legitimate question...

[kenwoodallpromos]

The US Congress and president are gung ho to protect us from off shore betting establishments, yet they are using Smartmatic voting machines to elect our government. Theses machines, of murky ownership by off shore entities, have no capability to be verified or audited, and have already proven to be suspect in Venezalia.


9-5 the results of this election are going to suspicious at least.
Gotta agree with Sec on this one - no way in hell e machines are ready to be used.
___________
Maybe they they have not voted to outlaw certain machines, but I do not believe COngress and Baby Bush is in charge- the states have various laws and decisions are often made on the county level, most of the counties in the USA I belive being Democrat majority.
If I was a Repulican I would be much more worried about the ACORN group.

[PlanB]

GT that's encouraging. I read where only 2 states demand a paper trail with
electronic voting, NY & Minnesota. GT, who makes that voting machine?
(just curious, not that I want one for Xmas)

[Secretariat]

I still don't see where it claims there is no audit trail. Claiming that there is no audit trail is being intellectually dishonest at best.

Maybe you missed this part:

"...only seven states will use devices that print a paper receipt of electronic votes from touch-screen machines—known as a “voter verified paper audit trail” or VVPAT—with more than a dozen states still pushing legislation to require paper records. This trend is extremely worrying to election security advocates. Some cause for comfort is that 50.2 percent of counties will use optical-scan machines that read hand-marked paper ballots (up from 41 percent in the 2000 election), since at least optical scan systems have a VVPAT—a paper ballot that was marked with a pen before being scanned by the machine."

We are talking about an audit trail. Preferably VVPAT - Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail, rather than RVNAT -Rove Verified Non-Paper Audit Trail.

Here's some more info on this if you like:

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5018#s1q3

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5018

I think what GT went through in his state creates the kind of voting reform all of us woudl like to see in a vote. You cast, your vote, you see it on a screen, you get a print out, and the matched print outs can be matched with the machine. This seems a no brainer.

[kenwoodallpromos]

http://www.kxmb.com/getARticle.asp?ArticleId=58657

[luv_america]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I see voter fraud split into two camps. Its the computer/hardware alleged fraud that mostly targets Diebold, and the dead people, illegal alien fraud that happens every election.

We need absolute voter reform in this country. Ballots need to be linked to your goverment issued, nearly hack-proof form of ID. Then all this silly stuff will mostly go away until its replaced by something else.

For the life of me I cannot understand why this is opposed.

[GameTheory]

I think it was a Smartmatic machine. I didn't notice a logo or anything on it, but it looks like the pictures I've seen and according to this:

http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_4568956

that's what they use in Denver, which is where I am. Some other places in Colorado got some Diebold machines which immediately started a lawsuit citing security concerns.

[PaceAdvantage]

"...only seven states will use devices that print a paper receipt of electronic votes from touch-screen machines—known as a “voter verified paper audit trail” or VVPAT—with more than a dozen states still pushing legislation to require paper records.

And if a machine doesn't use a paper audit trail, does that automatically mean there is NO audit trail whatsoever? NO, it doesn't mean this, and that is what I am talking about when I say intellectually dishonest.

[GameTheory]

And if a machine doesn't use a paper audit trail, does that automatically mean there is NO audit trail whatsoever? NO, it doesn't mean this, and that is what I am talking about when I say intellectually dishonest.Hey, I'm definitely on the "Sec is intellectually dishonest" bandwagon, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. You've got to admit that if there is no physical evidence outside of the machine of a ballot -- only what is in the machine's memory or on its hard drive -- then how the hell can you independently verify a ballot?

[chickenhead]

there will be some screw-ups I'm sure. Wondering what you are supposed to do with your receipt? Is there some place online you can check later to see that it all was logged in and counted properly? Having a correct printout doesn't mean jack.

website

enter voter id (randomly issued on paper slip)

check your vote

makes sense to me.

[GameTheory]

there will be some screw-ups I'm sure. Wondering what you are supposed to do with your receipt? Is there some place online you can check later to see that it all was logged in and counted properly? Having a correct printout doesn't mean jack.

website

enter voter id (randomly issued on paper slip)

check your vote

makes sense to me.
You don't get a printout. A printout is made, which you can verify, and then stored in the machine (on a big roll, like a cash register). You don't walk away with anything...

[chickenhead]

oh, I wasn't reading very closely. I like my idea better.

I get receipts for eveything else...sometimes I even stand around, waiting for a receipt, when I dont even want the damn thing. And I wonder, why am I waiting around? Just to be polite I guess.

If they're printing paper copies, they ought to give us one, so we can all verify things ourselves.

[PaceAdvantage]

Hey, I'm definitely on the "Sec is intellectually dishonest" bandwagon, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. You've got to admit that if there is no physical evidence outside of the machine of a ballot -- only what is in the machine's memory or on its hard drive -- then how the hell can you independently verify a ballot?

Off the top of my head, I can think of a number of ways to verify a ballot without paper. One would be to transmit the voting data electronically (preferably in real time) to an off-site state or federal election facility to be stored independently from the data on the voting machine.

[GameTheory]

oh, I wasn't reading very closely. I like my idea better.

I get receipts for eveything else...sometimes I even stand around, waiting for a receipt, when I dont even want the damn thing. And I wonder, why am I waiting around? Just to be polite I guess.

If they're printing paper copies, they ought to give us one, so we can all verify things ourselves.You do get to verify it, you just don't get to keep it. First, you vote with the touch screen. Then, it shows you all your votes on the screen and you redo anything that isn't right. Then, once you've verified that, it does the printout, and you verify that one page at a time. Only after you've given the final confirmation based on the printout is your ballot cast.

Now, if they do as you suggest and let you look up your vote later on the web, even if your name is supposedly not tied to it and you need a password, etc, you can imagine the kinds of privacy & security arguments you'd get on that one...

[GameTheory]

Off the top of my head, I can think of a number of ways to verify a ballot without paper. One would be to transmit the voting data electronically (preferably in real time) to an off-site state or federal election facility to be stored independently from the data on the voting machine.But then you're still left with basically, "The computers say this, and so that's that." Were the computers hacked? Can't tell. Remember, for a huge percentage of people, computers are still considered essentially "magic".

With a paper trail, they'd have to hack the computers and alter the paper records. If there is a paper trail, it is important that they use it to randomly sample some small percentages of ballots to make sure they match up, even if there is no official recount. They probably aren't doing that...

[PaceAdvantage]

Then you get to the point where you ask "Why have electronic voting machines if we still need all this damn paper for verification?"

BTW, HBO is going to be airing a documentary called HACKING DEMOCRACY and it is something right up Sec's, 46's, Hcap's, Suff's and Light's alley....

Can't wait for them to post on here about it, as soon as it hits the official talking points.

Why is it that *I* am usually the one telling these guys about all the new, cool, anti-Bush documentaries coming to town?

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/hackingdemocracy/synopsis.html

[PlanB]

Just call American Express & ask how they do it? A pal of mine a technician
at AE told me that once a month, when they tabulate everyone's AE bill, NOT
EVEN THE CEO OF AE COULD GET INTO THE BLDG. No Entrance ... security
is tight & ready. I just hate cheating no matter what the game. If cheats
do well, then what was really the outcome?

[GameTheory]

Then you get to the point where you ask "Why have electronic voting machines if we still need all this damn paper for verification?"
No hand counts needed for initial results.

No chads. No ambiguity when it comes time for verification, if needed.

Easier to vote the way you intended if you are stupid -- you see a big check mark next to your choice on the screen.

[Tom]

I heard about this stuff on the Lou Dobbs special over the weekend. His three guests were voting officials from vaious states. I'll see if I can find what day the transcripts came from and post a link tomorrow.

[DJofSD]

Any one else hear that the company is in part owned by Venezuelan interests?

From this web page: (http://http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/200604100835)

Many contradictions were present when relating the registry and commercial history of Sequoia, which began as Smartmatic in Curacao, was then registered in Holland, then in Florida, and incorported in Delaware until it finally bought out Sequoia Voting Systems in March 2005 for US$20 million. Alderman Burke corrected Blaine saying that it had been for $60 million. Sequoia represented Smartmatic in the Chicago elections, after being selected among 20 other competitors and four finalists in collaboration with the electoral commission of Cook County, according to David Orr of the electoral committee of said county. Sequoia has 20 years of electoral experience

Mr. Burke interrogated Blaine about Smartmatic investors and assured that Hugo Chávez was one of the 20 proprietors. Blaine answered by saying that he ignored who the investors are. Consequently, Burke replied: ...”Then you are the president and you don’t know if there are foreign investors in the company?” Smartmatic Internacional, according to Blaine, is in four countries and two hemispheres. However, in a later question by Alderman Smith about other countries were the company conducts business, Blaine said: “only in the US”. The legality and ownership of the company should be reflected in Economic Disclosure Statement, yet Blaine ignored if the company had complied with that requisite.

[Secretariat]

Then you get to the point where you ask "Why have electronic voting machines if we still need all this damn paper for verification?"

BTW, HBO is going to be airing a documentary called HACKING DEMOCRACY and it is something right up Sec's, 46's, Hcap's, Suff's and Light's alley....

Can't wait for them to post on here about it, as soon as it hits the official talking points.

Why is it that *I* am usually the one telling these guys about all the new, cool, anti-Bush documentaries coming to town?

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/
hackingdemocracy/synopsis.html (http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/hackingdemocracy/synopsis.html)

I appreciate the info PA, but I don't get HBO.

btw..I was curious what you considered an audit trail. Are you saying it basically reporting whatever the computer reported?

If you were in charge of QA for a non-paper ballot, a non VVPAT, how would you verify your audit of the vote on electronic machines? And please don't be intellectually dishonest with me?

[PaceAdvantage]

btw..I was curious what you considered an audit trail. Are you saying it basically reporting whatever the computer reported?

An audit trail is simply a record of who has accessed what and what functions they performed while having access, correct?

This can be accomplished in any number of ways, BUT EVERY WAY YOU CAN THINK OF CAN BE COMPROMISED by an ambitious third-party. Even if you see the machine spit out a piece of paper with your vote on it, how do you know it isn't creating a duplicate piece of paper in an undisclosed location with an opposite vote recorded? You can dream up any number of nightmare conspiracy scenarios you wish. How can you EVER REALLY be sure of ANY TYPE of audit trail?

It's clear by what GameTheory has said that electronic audit trails aren't trusted by many folks at this point in time (and rightfully so), so any type of electronic audit will not satisfy, even if it is conducted in real-time by a completely SEPARATE software program, running in conjunction with the electronic voting machine software.

My point in all this was not to debate various AUDIT TRAIL systems, but to get you to admit that there IS an audit trail in place with ALL these machines, whether you approve of them or not....that's all I'm asking you do admit. Even the ones WITHOUT a PAPER audit trail, DO HAVE some sort of audit trail in place, correct? That's ALL I was asking.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I just got my sample ballot -they moved my polling place.
I now vote at my local Citgo station!LOL!!

[JustRalph]

I just got my sample ballot -they moved my polling place.
I now vote at my local Citgo station!LOL!!

:lol: :lol: