Judge Denies Electronic Voting challenge... - GoFuckYourself.com

goBigtime · 02-22-2004, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Posted on Wed, Feb. 18, 2004

Judge denies electronic voting challenge to March 2 elections

JIM WASSERMAN

Associated Press

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A Sacramento County Superior Court judge rejected a legal challenge Wednesday to California's March 2 election over allegations that new electronic voting systems are vulnerable to hackers.

Judge Raymond Cadei denied a temporary restraining order sought against voting machine maker Diebold Election Systems Inc., saying there isn't enough evidence of security threats to justify interfering in an election just 13 days away. Diebold is based in North Canton, Ohio.

A group of computer programmers and California voters alleged that new electronic touch-screen voting machines being used in at least 14 counties on March 2 are insecure and could be manipulated to disrupt election results. Legal challengers included Sacramento computer consultant Jim March and Washington state resident Bev Harris, who has written extensively on possible security glitches in new electronic voting systems.

But 40 minutes into Wednesday's hearing, Cadei said he remained unconvinced "that there is a serious actual threat to the election process" and quickly ended a legal threat looming over elections that will elect legislative candidates and decide ballot propositions and U.S. presidential candidates.

Cadei, several times expressing his reluctance to disrupt an election where absentee voting has already begun, cited last year's judicial rulings that stopped final-hour efforts to cancel the Oct. 7 recall election.

County officials, who maintain their new voting systems will prove reliable, expressed relief over the ruling. Many had predicted greater chaos from the proposed last-minute security improvements sought by the legal challenge than from risks of doing nothing.

"We're 12 and a half days before a major election. You can't change the rules of the game at this stage," said Contra Costa County Clerk Stephen Weir, who attended the hearing.

Doug Stone, spokesman for Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, also praised the decision, saying Shelley appreciates "that the court has chosen not to interfere with the upcoming election."

Diebold attorney Daniel D. McMillan called the challenge a "waste of public resources" brought on by publicity-seeking "conspiracy theorists."

"Certainly, it reaffirms the company's position that its products are effective and clients, when they use them, are satisfied with them," McMillan said.

Lowell Finley, the Berkeley attorney who sought the order, said he was disappointed but that "we don't believe the issues are going away."

Finley argued that Diebold's electronic systems have weaknesses that "pose a grave threat to the security and integrity" of the March and November elections. He cited studies that called them "vulnerable to vote tampering both by company insiders and outside computer hackers."

Sad.

ibuydomains · 02-22-2004, 08:58 AM

Very sad...

Diebold's own servers have been hacked before
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,59925,00.html

02-22-2004, 08:58 AM	#2
ibuydomains Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 710	Very sad... Diebold's own servers have been hacked before http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,59925,00.html