Verified Voting Logo
Edit Your PreferencesContact VerifiedVoting.orgAbout VerifiedVoting.org
Verified Voting HomeJoin - Help us do this work!Donate - Help us do this work!Take Action Today!Endorse the resolution!
Printer Friendly Version

See information for:

The Verified Voting Foundation engages in educational activities permitted by IRC Section 501(c)(3). Please visit VerifiedVoting.org for info about 501(c)(4) lobbying activities. You can also visit Vote Trust USA, a project of the Verified Voting Foundation. Also, check out our blog and twitter feed.

E-Mail This Page

Home   »  Diebold admits voting system flaws


Diebold admits voting system flaws

E-voting manufacturer says votes could be changed undetected


Federal Computer Week
March 23rd, 2009

Critics of electronic voting systems have had their warnings vindicated by two recent announcements. An official with Premier Election Systems, formerly known as Diebold, admitted that its audit log system was flawed enough that it would be possible to delete votes undetected, and several elections officials in Kentucky were arrested on charges related to election fraud, including changing electronically recorded votes.

Wired reported that officials from Premier admitted in a hearing held March 17 in California that their tabulation software could miss significant events, including the deletion of votes on Election Day. They said the flaw is present in every version of the software.

The California Secretary of State's office discovered that audit logs from Diebold machines in Humboldt County, Calif., did not record known ballot deletions, according to Wired. Justin Bales, general sales manager for Premier's western region, told a state investigator that the software does not record deletions and never has.

The office was originally investigating the deletion of 197 votes in Humboldt County when its investigators discovered that the audit logs provided no information on the event.

The software also does not record timestamps on the events it does document, and it includes a "clear" button that allows the easy deletion of the audit logs, according to Wired and GovTech.

Such audit logs have been at the heart of the electronic voting machine controversy. Critics of the machines have long charged that it would be possible to change the recorded votes undetected, and they have urged that, at a minimum, the machines should generate a paper receipt that the voter would confirm was an accurate record of the vote. Elections officials would keep the paper records and use them to verify the accuracy of the electronically tabulated results in the event of a challenge. Voting machine makers have generally responded to such criticisms by saying that the combination of audit logs and capable elections officials following protocols would prevent fraud.

In Clay County, Ky., the FBI arrested several county elections officials on a variety of election fraud charges, including changing votes already recorded on the electronic voting machines, according to a Lexington, Ky., NBC affiliate. They have pleaded not guilty, the Associated Press reported.

According to the indictment against the eight defendants, some of the fraud also included instructing others on how to change votes on the machines and identifying voters who had sold their votes.

Announcements

August 26, 2010
On India’s Electronic Voting Controversy
August 25, 2010
Pac-Man for president: Hack highlights e-voting flaws
August 6, 2010
Voting Technology Research Gets In-Depth
July 27, 2010
State Election Officials: Recountable Process A Must for Overseas Voters
July 20, 2010
Online Voting: All That Glitters Is Not Gold (Unless You're a Vendor)
June 21, 2010
Voting Without A Net In South Carolina
June 17, 2010
Voting results in New Jersey should not be mysterious
June 16, 2010
Verified Voting Calls for Recountable, Auditable Voting Systems Following South Carolina Primary
June 16, 2010
Voting integrity groups call for investigation of South Carolina voting systems in wake of unexpected primary results in Democratic US Senate race
June 15, 2010
On the South Carolina Primary
May 23, 2010
Benefits, risks of e-mail ballots weighed
May 4, 2010
PA - Team 4: Security Concerns About Voting Machines Remain
April 26, 2010
California Assembly committee endorses UC Berkeley statistician's election auditing method
March 8, 2010
Feds Move to Break Voting-Machine Monopoly
March 2, 2010
Is the Internet the Right Place for Our Ballots? Election Administration and Voting Rights Thought Leaders Weigh in on the Future of Overseas Voting at Summit 2010
February 25, 2010
Minnesota Civic Groups Refute Recount Claims
February 17, 2010
Groups and Election Officials Warn Department of Justice that Voting Machine Vendor Merger will Inflate Costs to Taxpayers, Threaten Election Accuracy and National Security
February 11, 2010
Fla. justices uphold local election law
February 3, 2010
NJ Judge Issues Mixed Order on Use of E-voting Machines
February 1, 2010
Ruling Issued in Rutgers–Newark Law School’s Constitutional Litigation Clinic Challenge to NJ's Electronic Voting Machines

Get E-Mail Alerts




Important Links

  • VVBlog: Check out the latest news and commentary at our blog.
  • Election Day Problems?
    Call 1-866-OUR-VOTE
  • Find Your Polling Place: Vote411.org
  • Questions? Contact Us
  • Vote Trust USA - national resource for state-based organizations supporting verifiable elections, a Verified Voting Foundation project


  • "The core of our American democracy is the right to vote. Implicit in that right is the notion that that vote be private, that vote be secure, and that vote be counted as it was intended when it was cast by the voter. And I think what we're encountering is a pivotal moment in our democracy where all of that is being called into question." (more here)

    Kevin Shelley, former
    California Sec. of State





    Verified Voting Foundation, Inc., is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation.

    © Copyright 2008, Verified Voting Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved, although reprint permission granted for nonprofit purposes with attribution to Verified Voting Foundation, Inc.


    Privacy    Site Map