Excellent article! There is one more area of vulnerability that you did not mention in your summary of voting machine problems - Anonymous, unchecked and un-sworn contract programmers who write ballot definition software for each election have the first and best opportunity to hack the vote.

Ballot definition software is constructed for each voting precinct for each specific election and contains all the ballot details for that election. The DRE touch-screen and optical ballot scan machines use the ballot definitions to determine how selections on the touch-screen or paper ballot are interpreted and recorded in the vote database, and how election results are tallied. The BALLOT DEFINITION SOFTWARE is loaded on voting machines in the county elections office warehouse before the machines are even sealed with security tape.

The process of creating the ballot definition and vote tallying software is so complex that most counties contract the work to voting machine vendors. Voting machine vendors themselves do not maintain a staff of programmers large enough to write all the ballot definition software for all the voting precincts of all its county election administration customers across the U.S. Therefore, Voting machine vendors themselves must contract out the programming of ballot definition and vote tallying software for its customers.

Elections Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S) for example has a consulting partner, DecisionOne, who provides nationwide support services for ES&S’ voting systems including software installations, upgrades, retrofits, repair, and preventive maintenance for 1,700 election jurisdictions in 34 states. Yet other consultants write the last minute ballot definition software.

Who checks the credentials of all these various sub-contractors that write and install the "last minute" ballot software? Who asks if contract programmers also work for a political party or candidate up for election or if they have criminal records or work for a foreign government? Who performs detailed audits of the software they write and install on voting machines just before each election? The frightening answer to all questions is - no one!

Election officials appointed to safeguard election integrity, who have sworn an oath to safeguard election integrity, never see or even test the ballot definition and vote tallying software that is loaded onto their voting machines. Even if local election officials wanted to inspect the ballot software they are not computer scientists; They can neither adequately assess the competence and veracity of local temporary contractor programmers hired to work on voting machines nor review and assess the accuracy of software installed on their eVoting machines. In actuality, local election officials cannot verify that a contractor programmer's work is free of critical coding errors or that they did not nefariously write a few extra lines of software code that activates only on election day to flip votes or rig vote totals on a central tabulator and then self delete at the end of the election day.

DRE touch-screen and optical scan ballot counting machine "physical access security procedures" and "security seals" can never guard against incorrectly written ballot definition software. The frightening truth is ballot software is seldom tested by election office officials and can never be tested by polling place election judges and citizen observers to ensure that the ballot definition software is free of error, either inadvertent or malicious. The more that software is used in the administration of elections, the more we, as a nation, hand control of elections over to anonymous, unchecked and un-sworn contract programmers who may not even be American citizens living and working in the USA. One has to be a U.S. citizen to caste a vote, but anyone in the world can write the ballot software that controls our democracy.

In November 2006 there were 1,142 counties using DRE voting machines and 1,752 counties using optical scanners. This tabulates to 2,894 counties and 161,111 voting precincts that depend on ballot definition software written in weeks and days just before the election last November. That adds up to a lot programmers writing a lot of "last minute" ballot definition software that election officials never visually audited or tested by election officials.

It would be so easy for a political partisan to entice or plant a few willing temporary contractor programmers working with voting machine vendors or directly for key local election offices to stuff the software ballot box as they perform their legitimate programming duties. Even just a few motivated partisan programmers each working independently could easily throw an election and no one would ever know, unless the ballot definition software was inspected line-by-line.

by Runner (11 articles, 35 quicklinks, 47 diaries, 39 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007 at 10:43:46 AM

this is a fantastic collection of information.  If cited, it can be used in the future.  Shall I attribute it to "Runner" ?

by Rady Ananda (182 articles, 374 quicklinks, 49 diaries, 1718 comments [201 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007 at 1:30:15 PM

In a world where what you buy is tagged and tracked, where we are brought-up to ask for a receipt for every transaction, it is just incomprehensible to imagine why we can't do a simple thing like count someones vote.

It has to be obvious to even a half-wit that there is a reason why the powers that be don't want fair elections and it's the same reason we need to fight tooth and nail to see that we do.

by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007 at 12:11:57 PM

Again Rady a fantastic read. You're always at the top your game in being one of the best researchers I've had the pleasure to find. Keep it up!

by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007 at 12:15:49 PM

and more to come... I keep finding more reports!

by Rady Ananda (182 articles, 374 quicklinks, 49 diaries, 1718 comments [201 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007 at 2:10:30 PM