Like California and Florida before it, habitual swing state Ohio has just issued a report slamming its three providers of electronic voting equipment -- including, of course, renamed Diebold -- and recommending that the 50 counties which use them scrap the machines in favor of a paper-trail-leaving optical scanning method. The report, commissioned by Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, details the ways in which white hat hackers were able to infiltrate the systems, easily picking locks, using portable devices to manipulate vote counts, and even introducing "malignant software" into boards of election servers. Brunner's plan calls for the entire state's voting infrastructure to be overhauled by next year's presidential elections, a move likely to be lauded by touchscreen voting's many critics, but coming "about eight years too late, jerks -- thanks a lot," according to usually-even-tempered former candidate Al Gore.

We're going out on a limb here and assuming that precisely no one is surprised, but yes, another e-voting machine has proven totally incapable of resisting even the most unsophisticated of hacks. Not long after California Secretary of State Debra Bowen okayed the use of systems that failed prior security audits provided they make a few last minute attempts to appear invulnerable, a security penetration team revealed that an ES&S test system was no better than the rest. Reportedly, Red Team researchers were able to circumvent physical blocks with little effort, and they were even able to access internal files by making a quick and dirty change to the BIOS and booting it up with an external memory device. Needless to say, this deceased horse has been bludgeoned quite enough, but if you're interested in seeing a dozen pages of epic failure, the read link has got you covered. [Warning: PDF read link]

[Via ArsTechnica, image courtesy of USA Today]

Not to anyone's big surprise, e-voting is apparently not the most straightforward process in the world, but Connecticut's Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz is going so far as to release a 90-second video clip that demonstrates how to correctly place a vote using a vanilla optical scan voting machine. Yep, this means you'll be able to surf on over and download a 1.5-minute instructional video that will purportedly "lure young voters to the polls," and while Bysiewicz did admit that those who could operate an iPod could likely figure out a voting machine, she's hoping that "providing voting information through a familiar mechanism" will somehow encourage the younger sect to get their vote on. We know, all of this is worthless sans a vid, right? Never fear, it's waiting to put you to sleep after the jump.

According to an AP article released today, Diebold, one of the prominent makers of the recently embattled electronic voting machines, says that the company has failed to make its e-voting business profitable. If you'll recall, Diebold machines have repeatedly been the target of various hacks, many of which have proven the machine to be susceptible to intrusion from outside elements and thus unreliable from a security standpoint. The company has reduced its revenue outlook by $120 million, and has plans to allow its e-voting unit to operate more independently, giving the team its own board of directors and possibly a new management structure. To complete the overhaul of the ailing division, the company will also change the name of the branch from "Diebold Election Systems" to the starkly different "Premier Election Systems." Diebold blames the "rapidly evolving political uncertainties and controversies surrounding state and jurisdiction purchases of electronic voting systems," for much of its problems... as opposed to the fact that they currently produce faulty, unprotected, and unreliable machines.

Yeah, remember those white hats that took out three separate systems with ease in a California e-voting system security audit? Well what do you know, the eminently wise and honorable California Secretary of State Debra Bowen up and decided Friday that those severely vulnerable Diebold, Hart, and Sequoia voting terminals would still be cleared for takeoff, provided the companies in question supply their machines with updated firmware, disabled access to unused ports, kill the wireless connections, and so on. So basically, the companies that deny up and down their voting systems are even vulnerable are now directly responsible for making them less vulnerable per seemingly vague security-hardening guidelines. As usual, we suggest preempt these fools' garbage tech entirely and go low-fi on it: if you suspect your district is or will be using e-voting machines, send your votes by mail.

[Thanks, Daniel]

Right on cue, the Electoral Commission has published findings from a number of UK e-voting trials, and just as expected, they went about as awry as they possibly could. Within the 24-page document resides a comedy of errors that would certainly put any other system on an eternal blacklist, but the blind faith in e-voting continues to allow events such as these to complicate democratic procedures. For starters, it was noted that the "use of electronic counting significantly increased the total cost of delivering these elections compared with a manual count," and furthermore, the scanning of ballot papers "took a lot longer than expected due to the need to scan certain batches more than once." Needless to say, the amount of mishaps involved are far too numerous to cover in this space, but hopefully the UK will take our interestingly administered warning to heart now that it has experienced similar turmoil. [Warning: PDF read link]

[Via The Inquirer, image courtesy of BBC]

The fact that some individuals still have any level of faith left in Diebold is quite baffling, but in case you were looking for just one more episode to dash your hopes of a hack-proof voting machine, open wide. As fate would have it, a fresh study in Florida has found that even optical scan voting systems "can be hacked into," which is causing quite a bit of concern considering that touchscreen alternatives aren't exactly an option in the Sunshine State. Reportedly, the document noted that "official memory cards in the optical scan machines could easily be exchanged with ones altering the vote count," and it was also stated that Diebold must "deal with the flaws" by August 17th. Yeah, we're sure it's all over that.

[Thanks, Josh]

Voting machine makers scoffing at bad reviews? That's preposterous! Actually, it's not all that alarming to hear that Diebold, Hart InterCivic, and Sequoia Voting Systems all had less-than-amicable responses to a state study that "found that their machines could be breached by hackers." Of course, we're not exactly sure what all that groaning is about, as we've seen nothing but proof to back the investigation up. Nevertheless, Sequoia dubbed the review "an unrealistic, worst-case-scenario evaluation," Diebold kvetched that the study didn't look at its most recently developed software, Hart found "several inconsistencies, alternate conclusions, and errors," and Elections Systems & Software bypassed the rigmarole entirely by failing to provide their information to the secretary of state. Oh, the irony. [Warning: Read link requires subscription]

If you didn't see this one coming, we'll just assume the glaring sun had you blinded, as the Sunshine State has apparently had quite enough of the e-voting woes within its borders. Florida Governor Charlie Crist signed into law a bill "requiring that all voting districts in the state replace most touchscreen electronic voting machines with optical scan machines." From day one, the state has been plagued with one mishap after another, and while some touch-screen systems will be maintained for "handicapped voters that require its features to vote unaided," the vast majority of the Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) machines will be nixed in favor of a less hackable flavor. Flinging one last blow of frustration at the e-voting curse, Crist went so far as to suggest that ditching them would allow Floridians to "leave the polling place knowing that their vote had been counted and recorded and can be verified." Of course, we're sure the tax-paying citizens of the state are entirely more focused on the $27.8 million he approved to buy all new optical scan equipment.

In an unprecedented attempt to shore up any possible flaws in its counties' electronic voting machines -- the same machines that have been examined and criticized nationwide on many occasions -- California will undertake a so-called "top-to-bottom" review of numerous systems from some half-a-dozen vendors, who must meet a set of seemingly rigid criteria if they want to receive certification for the 2008 election. Giving the proposed three-pronged approach -- initiated by Secretary of State Debra Bowen in collaboration with the University of California -- some real teeth is the fact that each of the three teams tasked with the actual work will be spearheaded by respected academics and leading private sector consultants, including none other than Princeton's Ed Felten, whose tireless efforts to expose the dangers of these shoddy machines are well known to readers of this site. Specifically, each system from manufacturers such as Sequoia, ES&S, and yes, everyone's favorite whipping boy Diebold will see a thorough review of their source code and documentation, along with what are being referred to as "red team penetration" attacks to test the terminals' hardware and software. Since companies are required to submit equipment for testing if they wish to partake in future elections, we could be seeing Diebold make the same begrudging exit from the Golden State as it did from North Carolina, for what we are not alone in suspecting is fear of exposing its flimsy code. Anyone who does choose to participate still risks being forced to make significant changes to their gear or perhaps even complete decertification, so when you Californians go to cast your votes in about eighteen months, don't be surprised if you have to mark up a piece of paper and drop it into a Equalivote-brand ballot box.

[Via Slashdot]

France has been using e-voting machines since 2003, and most notably in the 2005 European constitutional 2005, where 50 e-voting municipalities were in play, but now that the number has climbed to 80 (out of 36,000), and a presidential election is at stake, several parties are crying foul -- and quite loudly. No specific incidents of fraud have been cited yet, but protesters sued to ban the machines outright a week before the election, noting that some models don't comply with a dual-key requirement for safety from fraud, and others, such as the iVotronic machines, have new software, but haven't been re-verified since 2005. After the first round of voting on Sunday, objections have become even more vocal, with The Socialists, the Communist Party and the Greens all banding together to decry the e-voting method as a "catastrophe." Apparently the machines posed a particular obstacle to the elderly, with some researches claiming that as many as four out of seven people over 65 couldn't vote properly. Also, voting lines were long in general, and the two hour wait on some e-voting machines apparently caused some voters to leave. The interior ministry claims they have had no problems with the machines since they were introduced in 2003. With 12 presidential candidates in the election, the three parties speaking up here by no means comprise a majority, but we're guessing we won't be hearing the end of this for a good while -- especially if things don't go their way in round two of the votes.

Read - French parties call voting machines a "catastrophe"
Read - Protestors sue to stop e-voting

Oddly enough, it seems that the Sunshine State attracts more than just tourists and nice weather, as Florida is now facing yet another round of e-voting woes long after elections have ended. While Diebold machines certainly administered their fair share of fits, now iVotronic's own systems are purportedly to blame for a controversial election in Sarasota County last November. Upon further review, officials noticed "symptoms consistent with a known software flaw" in the aforementioned machine, which countered the "county officials' claims that a bug played no role in the election results." Of course, this won't mark the first time that late-blooming documents shed light on a potential voting mishap, but it seems that both parties are standing their ground on this one. Apparently, the issues were spotted during the primary election, but since they appeared on a "smaller scale," they weren't adequately addressed. Currently, no individuals have been legally blamed for their deceptive handling of the probable mishap, but we'd seriously suggest that Florida thinks mighty hard before loosing these flawed machines on the public next time around.

Now we know that we're not supposed to take pleasure in the misfortunes of others, but when habitually-shady voting machine manufacturer Diebold loses a $9 million contract and starts whining about it in court, well, we think it's okay to make an exception. As the nation's leading election thrower e-voting provider, old Diebold thought that it was a shoo-in to win the Massachusetts Secretary of State's bid for 3,500 terminals for disabled voters -- and was so shocked when the contract was awarded to rival AutoMARK, that it's actually going to court to have the contract overturned or revisited at the very least. The company's completely immodest argument against the state and Secretary William Galvin basically boils down to this: "Since we've beaten AutoMARK for contracts all over the country, it only makes sense that we get this one too -- and because we didn't, there must be some cheating going on." For his part, Galvin calls the suit "frivolous" and claims that the best candidate did in fact win: disabled voters who tested all the machines reportedly formed a consensus around the AutoMARKs, and those machines have the added benefit of employing the same paper ballots as regular units, helping to ensure users' privacy. Despite the fact that it has "no hard evidence of unfair treatment," Diebold is nonetheless seeking an injunction on the use of its competitor's gear (some of which has already been delivered), or optimally, a complete reversal of the state's decision. No timetable on a decision yet, but when Diebold's forced to crawl back to Ohio with its tail between its legs, we'll let ya know.

[Via Slashdot]

In case the Brits were still wondering if we Americans finally had our act together in regard to e-voting, this should add yet another nail in the coffin. Among the bevy of states that saw all sorts of turmoil when voters turned to electronic machines to cast their support was Florida, and while a recent motion doesn't speak of that specific incident, it does highlight a good bit of potential negligence. Apparently, a note was "uncovered" last September (but was withheld until just last week) which documented a "possible problem" with Election Systems & Software's iVotronic touchscreen machine, but wasn't used to scrutinize the finicky system before loosed to the voting public. The eventually malfunctioning software was linked to a "dispute over the 13th Congressional District race in November," which supposedly caused a high rate of "undervoting," and allowed Vern Buchanan to take the questionable gold by a mere 400 votes. Regardless, it's a little late for a recount, don't you think? [Warning: PDF read link]

[Via Wired]