SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: zonkie who wrote (13301)4/8/2004 12:13:11 PM
From: zonkieRespond to of 81568
 
This should give the people trying to get Diebold to divulge their source code some ammunition. Diebold is important because if something isn't done there will be a cloud of suspicion hanging over the outcome in Ohio and other states no matter who wins them.
___________________________

E-voting firm opens up its code

By Alan Boyle
MSNBC

Updated: 9:12 p.m. ET April 07, 2004BELLEVUE, Wash. - A software company voluntarily released the source code for its paperless ballot verification system on Tuesday, marking a first in the increasingly controversial electronic-voting market.

Bellevue-based VoteHere said the code, along with documentation and examples included in the downloadable software package, would allow outside experts to evaluate how the company's VHTi technology works to verify election results. The VHTi system uses cryptographic methods to secure ballots and flag vote-tampering efforts.

"Now it's up to the world to take a look and dig in and give us their opinion," the company's founder, Jim Adler, told MSNBC.com.

E-voting systems have sparked a sharp debate over the past few months, due to well-publicized glitches as well as wider concerns over computer security. In January, a group of computer scientists contended that no Internet-based election system could be fully secured against fraud, leading the Defense Department to cancel an Internet voting experiment. Similar concerns have been raised over the use of e-voting machines in traditional polling places — and state election officials are taking the concerns to heart.

One of the country's foremost skeptics about paperless e-voting, Stanford Professor David Dill, said releasing the source code for e-voting software was a "very unusual" and "very healthy" development. But he stressed that it was far too early to pass judgment on VoteHere's software itself.

"I think it's a good business move, and I think it's a good thing for building confidence in a new technology," Dill, who created the Verified Voting Foundation, told MSNBC.com. "Releasing the software is part of what has to happen. The other part is having increased scrutiny. ... I hope that this step will result in careful external review."

In order to be used in actual elections, voting systems must be certified by federal and state officials. But VoteHere's source-code release is aimed more at a community of academics and activists who have raised concerns about electronic voting in particular.

The unauthorized release of source code for Diebold Election Systems' e-voting software, the market leader, sparked volleys of charges and countercharges last year. "Doing a voluntary release of the software in this case, versus the involuntary release in Diebold's case, is the right way to do things," Dill said.

Computer policy consultant Barbara Simons, who was among the critics of the Pentagon's Internet voting experiment, also praised the release of the source code. But Bruce Schneier, the founder and chief technology officer of Counterpane Internet Security, said the availability of the code would not sway him from his opposition to paperless voting systems.

"Just because it's released doesn't mean it's secure," he told MSNBC.com.

Schneier said he didn't plan to analyze the source code — and wondered whether any serious security experts would take on the challenge. "That would take 80 to 100 hours of my time, and no one's going to pay me," he said.

Not ready for prime time
VoteHere has not yet put its technology into existing election systems, but it has made a deal with Sequoia Voting Systems for incorporating VHTi software in future machines.

Even if hackers break into a voting system, the verification software would keep the ballots secure and sound an alarm, Adler said. Last year, VoteHere's corporate network weathered a computer attack, but the company said no voting software was compromised.

"What VHTi does is, it detects problems with the election system," he explained. "You can build a fence as high as you want, but if somebody gets in the yard, you want to make sure you know about it. So VHTi is that barking dog in the yard."

The source code is not a complete commercial product. A "known issues" section lists functions and features that still need to be added or tweaked, Adler said. But the package includes a voting-machine simulation that lets programmers see how the system works.

"You can actually program it to cheat, and you can watch where the protocol detects where your ballot was changed ... which I think is very instructive," he said.

Adler said the long-promised release of the source code was held up so that the process could be reviewed by an outside company, Plus Five Consulting of Palo Alto, Calif. The consultants' feedback was incorporated in the release process, Adler said.

In a written statement, Plus Five co-founder Robert Baldwin, who was formerly a technical director at RSA Security, said the source code was written "in a professional and consistent style, making it easy to understand and review."

more---
msnbc.msn.com



To: zonkie who wrote (13301)4/8/2004 12:38:40 PM
From: H-ManRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
Lots of attempt to mischaracterize Aug 6 memo, fell on their face.

Kerry and Benveniste tried to pose questions with false premisises and then not let Rice answer. She did not let them get away with it.

Applause from the I hate Bush crowd, makes you look like petty partisans, unconcerned with the nations security and focused on a game of gotcha.

The American people see through it.



To: zonkie who wrote (13301)4/8/2004 12:47:53 PM
From: JakeStrawRespond to of 81568
 
sponsor: kerry campaign

The visual: Over a grainy, black-and-white photo of a chain-link fence, three workers leave a job site, lunch boxes in hand. Next, "newspaper" headlines like "Bush Supports Shift of Jobs Overseas" float across the cover of the president's budget. Finally, John Kerry shakes hands with hard-hatted construction workers, seniors, and veterans.

The verbal: "While jobs are leaving our country in record numbers, George Bush says sending jobs overseas makes sense for America. His top economic advisers say moving American jobs to low-cost countries is a plus for the U.S. John Kerry's proposed a different economic plan that encourages companies to keep jobs here. It's part of a detailed economic agenda to create 10 million jobs. John Kerry: A new direction for America."

The verdict: Mr. Kerry's highly touted economic plan appears dreamy rather than detailed, since he proposes a slew of new tax credits without offsetting tax increases elsewhere in the budget.

Besides, the Bush administration's free-market approach seems to be working: Just as Mr. Kerry's new ad hit the airwaves, the Labor Department announced the strongest job market in four years, with 308,000 new workers added to U.S. payrolls during the month of March alone.



To: zonkie who wrote (13301)4/8/2004 1:05:46 PM
From: cnyndwllrRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
Another side story is that Rice said NOTHING that would discredit Clarke's testimony or his public statements. Not one thing.

In fact she basically confirmed everything Clarke said.

She can disagree with his opinions and conclusions but all that talk about "perjury" and misleading testimony is now revealed as pure disinformation and personal, smear tactics.



To: zonkie who wrote (13301)4/8/2004 1:48:22 PM
From: ChinuSFORespond to of 81568
 
August 6 PDB ------- title---------
Bin Laden determined to attack inside the USA

Aha, you got it. Even the chair of the committee, a Republican, requested that it be declassified. Let us see how Bush responds. This is no laughing matter, the Lewinsky affair type, you know what I mean.