Diebold comes clean, admits that its e-voting machines are faulty

For years, Diebold has embarrassed itself by claiming that obvious faults were actually not faults at all, and during the past decade or so, it mastered the act of pointing the finger. Now that it has ironically renamed itself Premier Election Solutions, it's finally coming clean. According to spokesman Chris Riggall, a "critical programming error that can cause votes to be dropped while being electronically transferred from memory cards to a central tallying point" has been part of the software for ten years. The flaw is on both optical scan and touchscreen machines, and while Mr. Riggall asserts that the logic error probably didn't ruin any elections (speaking of logic error...), the outfit's president has confessed to being "distressed" about the ordeal. More like "distressed" about the increasingly bleak future of his company.

[Via Techdirt]

[AlekZander @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:43PM]

Christ, how hard could it be to make one of these machines? I feel like I would've been able to make an e-voting machine work by the time I had passed Programming 101. Talk about incompetence.

[Techie @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:50PM]

All you need is a team of monkey and 1 guy from the Geek Squad from BestBuy. That's your secret ingredient. ;)

[James M @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:28PM]

Techie's right, even if his grammar isn't. Surely one guy from Geek Squad could sort this out. The people at Diebold / whatever must be complete idiots. They have successfully ruined what could have been a wonderful thing. They need to move on to somewhere they can't do any more damage - like a bank, or the airline industry.

[thedesolate1 @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:36PM]

It probably runs windows CE. On another note we can land a man on the moon and create a cell processor "supercomputer" on a chip but cant even get a god damn voting machine to count votes correctly... You would think that after all the scandals that the government would learn that privatizing roles that should be otherwise done by the government is a bad idea. Then again its pick you poison the bush administration or a corporation.

[waiownsyou @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:38PM]

You're making the process sound way too easy. It's not like "var Candidate1; Candidate1++;" or anything like that. A lot of authentication and security has to take place. Do you really think it's safe to allow misfits to control something that handles the world's dominant nation?

[Matt @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:17PM]

Jesus these guys suck. There are ATM machines that dole out thousands of dollars a day and they are completely secure. How hard can it be to make a secure voting machine.

Someone in politics must like this company.

[zmjjmz @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:18PM]

If you put the machines on a VPN with some serious encryption (to send back the results), why would you need security?
Arguably someone could hack the voting machines (physically, like taking it apart inside the booth), but it's not like the current setup prevents it.

[TheMattrix @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:55PM]

@zmjjmz

A highly-encrypted VPN would be a very good way to go about it, as long as the voting machines could only see the central server and not each other. They could even send the results over an SSH tunnel for an additional layer of security.

If they're *really* concerned about sending data over the internet, each machine could have no network connection at all. Data from each machine could be physically brought to a central location, merged, then sent to the next central location until it's all in once place. (The data would be digitally signed and encrypted with the destination's public key.)

[ben @ Aug 24th 2008 12:40AM]

It was that goddamn McAffee virus software! It didn't live up to its promise of comprehensive security!

[Setnev @ Aug 24th 2008 12:36PM]

Awhile back Diebold wanted to purchase the company that i work for. The company i work for makes multimedia solutions for financial and government institutions. I am glad that my boss decided against it, what would become of our world class products.

[drivin98 @ Aug 30th 2008 4:41PM]

Of course they're insecure. They were designed that way.

[Dariousg @ Aug 25th 2008 11:55AM]

I don't think it comes down to incompetence my friends (as some are saying). It's not about 'not knowing' how to program a simple process such as transferring votes. It's about money and who THEY want to be elected. They say "whoever pays the most or has our interests at heart will get elected". It's been like this since e-voting was introduced. Which means that the shams that occupy the oval office right now were NOT voted in by the people for the people. They were voted in by BIG BUSINESS for BIG BUSINESS. Boy did they deliver. If you are in the arms industry, homeland security industry or oil industry you have done VERY well over the past 8 years.

Long live Heir Bush!

[GRIMMWOLFF @ Nov 15th 2008 10:33PM]

Fuck Diebold! Just went & put 350$ into my account & it took the cash with a reply of cannot complete transaction 00.00 dollars. So here I am out of cash for bills & food. Worse yet the woman next to me lost 900$ on a completely different machine. Think voting is bad? Try there ATM's for a completely rewarding experience! NOT!

[waiownsyou @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:48PM]

I recall my Political Science professor at the University talking about how one of the electronic polling booths in a Democratic region in Florida had like -6000 votes or something like that for Gore and a positive number for Bush.

Failed sauce--- best served warm.

[steven @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:59PM]

"Political Science professor at the University"

Enough said.

[steven @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:52PM]

Anyways... I HATE my yellow teeth.

[JamesM @ Aug 23rd 2008 11:08PM]

I have gammas. I'm so glad I'm a beta.

[egbertsouse @ Aug 24th 2008 2:26PM]

steven,

Are you proud that you are stupid and uneducated?

or

Are you afraid of what you might learn if you went to school?

[steven @ Aug 24th 2008 9:43PM]

Are you so stupid that you can not understand what I said?

[Rurik @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:49PM]

Remember that Diebold is no longer around. They renamed their company to Premier Election Solutions to avoid the bad press. They changed their name in Aug 07 and even took off the Diebold name from the machines in 2006.

It wouldn't do good to bring up flak about Diebold while still letting states buy into Premier Election Solutions.

Just saying... :)

[Randy @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:50PM]

Sorry for the last eight years....
Sincerely,
Diebold/Premier Election Services

[thedesolate1 @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:40PM]

Dear Diebold/Premier Election Solutions.
Go FUCK yourselves.
Sincerely,
The American People

[Jon Doe. @ Aug 24th 2008 1:08AM]

Dear American People,
Serves you right for not demanding an audit of the software. Don't blame us that you don't hold your elected, or not so elected, officials accountable.
Sincerely,
Diebold/Premier Election Solutions.

[dantaylor08 @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:59PM]

and the machine only drops votes of the candidates diebold doesn't support, right?

[Shadyman @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:56PM]

Or candidates that don't support Diebold.

[a ham sandwich @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:06PM]

yet, if you count votes the old fashion way, you'd probably lose (or gain) more votes due to human error (or, sadly, maliciousness).

[egbertsouse @ Aug 24th 2008 2:18PM]

The point is there is a paper copy and the results can be audited. With Diebold the results are un-auditable.

[thief @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:06PM]

...wow.

http://www.xkcd.com/463/

[aquatsr @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:16PM]

Who signed off on using e-voting anyway? Everyone knows that the people who cared about this stuff were too corrupt to be trusted with it (or too incompetent to do it correctly) and that everyone who could do it correctly weren't corrupt enough to get a chance to program it.

[Charles R Hamilton @ Aug 24th 2008 10:52AM]

The rise of electronic voting came after some people in Florida were deemed to stupid to use a paper ballot. I won't say which party they belonged to, but it rhymes with "democrat".

[remmelt @ Nov 10th 2008 7:45AM]

"deemed to stupid to use a paper ballot"

[sic]

[Rob @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:35PM]

Elections are always rigged anyway. We don't need a computer to remind us that elections are fixed. Just ask Bush how he and Cheney won (manipulated) their first presidency. I abstained from voting because I thought our candidates were crap. I made the mistake of voting for Bush on the second term. This time around, I think we have an old witch who doesn't want to leave the party. A grumpy old man who thinks he's a national hero and should be held in high places because his daddy and gramps were admirals. And then, we have Obama who we don't really know what he's all about. But darn it, people love him. Again, I think we are forced to choose, on the surface, between the best of both liars. And at the end of the day, or night to be more specific, the electoral college will do what it wants and choose whomever "the powers that be" have told them to because that's why they've been put in power for, to serve the mighty and influential.

Am I voting in the presidential elections this year? You better believe it. Who am I voting for? I have no clue at all. Am I a swing voter? Nope. I just don't think neither one of the two appointed candidates offer us any hope for more prosperous times. Instead of focusing on the real problems in our country, they play silly blame games and distracting crap. Way to go.

[telepheedian @ Aug 24th 2008 7:57AM]

^ thread winner

[eligray @ Oct 24th 2008 2:40PM]

The thing is that any candidate, no matter how great, can't win without running a campaign like these. Remember Kucinich from the Democratic Primaries? i didn't think so. He lost because most voters never got a chance to hear him speak. All we have to go by because of this is somebody's general mentality, which I think Obama should be the winner of. He makes empty promises, but then again, he wouldn't be able to get in a position to make any positive changes without some empty promises. Besides, he shows deep insight when addressing issues like abortion, whereas Mccain tends to answer bluntly in a manner that can get him the most votes.

Also, I liked how when it was Clinton vs Obama, Clinton's campaign said you couldn't choose between them based upon voting records, since they were so similar, and you couldn't judge him by his short track record, and you couldn't listen to what he had to say, in short saying you could only know Obama by whatever the Clinton campaign said about him.

I respect your decision if you vote for McCain based upon wanting to continue the war, but i cannot respect anyone who gives in to claims that Obama is a practicing Muslim (not that it should matter anyways), or that he's a terrorist (doesn't that go along nicely with the first thing?). Decide based upon their stance on issues, not on irrelevant facts thrown out by each side's hate campaign.

[Graham @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:36PM]

Woah, Seriously? They were faulty? Who woulda guessed.

[hfm @ Aug 23rd 2008 9:44PM]

Yeah... and Bush won Ohio by the skin of his teeth, on Diebold voting machines.... and wasn't someone high up in the company a Bush campaign supporter?.... hmmm

[Charles R Hamilton @ Aug 24th 2008 1:27PM]

Yea, if you call 118,599 votes the skin of your teeth. Most wouldn't.

[HunterXI @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:00PM]

You have to wonder how screwed up Diebold's (oh, sorry, Premier Election Solution's) management/communication structure must be if they missed several critical bugs which cripple non-updatable machines.

[scott @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:00PM]

Pretty easy to tell if the vote was rigged. If one side goes to court to stop a state mandated manual recount and wins by a hand full of votes bet your last dollar on corruption.

[fm @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:05PM]

It's not like people have been claiming this all along! Diebold and comp all said:"nooo! You're just paranoid."
I'm not saying they rigged an election, but when you ask them for a SIMPLE way to print a ticket to double check the e-results, they said "no. What for?"

[ronzo @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:15PM]

Diebold and Governments are a perfect match. They both live in denial.

[BigD145 @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:15PM]

Optical scan are just as prone to failure as the touch screens. The paper trail is meaningless if paper recounts are held up by Bush family friends.

[John @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:30PM]

I'd say that "clean" for diebold is a relative term, at the very least...

[retread @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:31PM]

As a child growing up in Australia, I always looked up to Americans - with their amazing inventiveness and kind hearts, always willing to be the 'good guys' in a time of great uncertainty. These days, with a much closer Canadian vantage point, I can only sit back and wonder at the mastery of the few who have manipulated a once great country into what is now, an almost pitiful entity.
The society has been so dumbed-down and bibled-up that they'll swallow any nonsense. Be afraid to speak up and hold any of your leaders accountable! I know I'd be shivering in my boots in these Orwellian times.
After reading about the confirmed rigged (buggy) voting machines, I have very little hope for your, and consequently my, future. Sheesh - I mean, can you imagine an ATM... ahh doesn't matter, where's my vodka?

[BigD145 @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:42PM]

I can tell you right off the bat that these machines don't just drop votes, they change votes as the votes are being cast. I've had it happen to me and others I know. Good laws has been lost.

[andy @ Aug 24th 2008 12:44AM]

thats exactly what is wrong with the american people. in the 04 election, 54% of registered voters voted... PATHETIC.

[intel352 @ Aug 24th 2008 11:04AM]

"bibled up"

Ironically, people claim we're more "bibled up", yet 30 or so years ago, our nation was more God fearing, had more true Christians, etc.
We even used to have prayer in schools

I about guarantee you it's our *lack* of being "bibled up" that's gotten us to the point where we are now. The nation has lost it's fear of God.

Cheers

[Amerist @ Aug 24th 2008 1:52PM]

I agree that most of my fellow Americans have lost their will to challenge the leadership in Washington on the most critical points and at the times when it was most called-for. So many have become seduced by the corporate news media which tells them how to feel about issue X Y or Z. As long as "someone else" is doing the thinking around here, most people are content to sit by on the sidelines and watch this monumental clusterfuck of a political system trash the nation like a tornado touching down in suburbia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Thf4rzZ_Vds

[dukemang @ Aug 23rd 2008 10:33PM]

I've always wondered this too. I mean there is a team that can write software for the shuttle where people CAN actually die if you screw up and they DON'T screw up. How hard is it to accurately capture a users input, store it and transmit it? How hard is it to hire some testers. Hell just ask for beta testers, we'll do it for free if it means fast, accurate electronic voting.

[kadajawi @ Aug 24th 2008 9:31AM]

Wait, didn't lots of people die because the wrong person became president (well, if... I wouldn't be surprised if Americans really did vote Bush).