Diebold Quietly Patches Security Flaw in Vote Counting Software

Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold, has patched a serious security weakness in its election tabulation software used in the majority of states, according to a lab that tested the new version and a federal commission that certified it. Full Story »

Posted by Mike LaBonte - via Ellen Miller, Wired
Tags Help
Subjects: Politics, Sci/Tech
Topics: Election Reform
Stats Help
# Tweets: 45 (as of 2009-08-12)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Mike LaBonte - Aug 12, 2009 - 8:21 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Mike LaBonte - Aug 12, 2009 - 7:36 PM PDT
Mike LaBonte
3.9
by Mike LaBonte - Aug. 12, 2009

A followup to some great investigative journalism. This story surprisingly falls a little short on context, failing to explain some things that many people will not know about GEMS. The suggestion to read the report seems odd in a news article, but it may be hinting at future stories.

GEMS can be used with both DREs and with optical scanners, but is entirely optional. Before election day it programs the machines. After the election GEMS mostly collects the results from individual machines and combines them. In Massachusetts for example, few if any communities probably use GEMS, outside of Boston.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Dwight Rousu
4.2
by Dwight Rousu - Aug. 13, 2009

Zetter reports on changes and testing of electronic vote counting software. He reports past problems, but seems pacified about other and continuing problems with oversight and openness of the vote counting process.

The hacking of the vote by repugnantcans in Diebold may not have been uncovered without the heroic efforts of many people, such as those at blackboxvoting.org

It’s not known if Premier will offer the more secure version to election officials who purchased previous software. The company did not respond to a call for comment ... More »

See Full Review » (14 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.0

Good
from 3 reviews (36% confidence)
Quality
4.0
Facts
4.3
Fairness
4.0
Sourcing
3.7
Style
3.3
Context
4.0
Depth
3.7
Enterprise
5.0
Relevance
4.3
Popularity
3.8
Recommendation
4.3
Credibility
3.7
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

  • Will new elections "audits" help or hurt?

    () The flaw in the Holt Bill (HR 811) so-called audits (I call them spot checks or samplings, not audits) -- anyway, one flaw is the assumption that there won't be ballot ...
    Posted by Dwight Rousu