Are Voting Machines Reliable?

(CBS)  Nothing stirs political blood quite like an incumbent's own survival, which was a big reason that members of Congress were questioning the security of electronic voting machines Thursday, CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian reports.

The machines in question include the Diebold Accu Vote TSX. Translation: Your ballot box.

This November, for the first time, more than 80 percent of all votes in this country will be cast or counted electronically. It's the result of the federal law that Congress passed in the wake of the Bush-Gore "hanging chad" debacle, requiring that states and counties phase out paper ballots in favor of touch-screens and optical scanners.

"There will be glitches, but I think in the end result, you can have confidence in the system," says Paul DeGregorio, chairman of the Election Assistance Commission.

But lately, trust has been shaken. In a recent Maryland primary, officials forgot to include 13,000 electronic access cards needed to activate machines, resulting in voter chaos. In Ohio's biggest county, there were problems with the paper backup system — critical in any recount.

"These things are sort of like wrestling octopuses," says Keith Cunningham, an Ohio election official.

"The more people understand computers and the more they work with computers, the less thrilled they are about electronic voting," adds Avi Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

On Capitol Hill, members are especially concerned about electronic voting because there are about 40 razor-thin congressional races that could tip the balance of power in Congress.

For example, if a computer virus infected a voting machine, it could tilt an election.

Princeton University's Ed Felten demonstrated this when he obtained a Diebold machine and ran a mock presidential election. Three votes were cast for George Washington, and none for Benedict Arnold. But then, a computer virus went to work. Suddenly, Arnold won, two votes to one.

"Either you switch to a backup system, like a low-tech paper ballot, or you just cross your fingers and hope for the best," Felten says.

Diebold calls the study "unrealistic and inaccurate" and says Felten hacked outdated software. Next week, the federal government will propose new standards for machine certification. But those standards won't take effect until January — two months after a lot of political fates will be decided.

[punkinpie1]

I think you have your head burried in the sand.
Democrats are standing in a very good position
this election. We have proven that the repub-
licans are back a sick individual who has a
demented mind. I don't think the American public
will permit that to happen again. If there is a
scandal brewing in the wind I don't think Ameri-
cans will put up with it. We were robbed once I
don't think it will happen again. We have so much
to lose. We have our freedoms that are at stake
here. We have been basically robbed of that with
George W. Bush. If you notice a lot of his fellow
Republicans were scurring away from him. So what
ever happens with the next congress has got to
be better than what we unfortunately have now!

[punkinpie1]

Well I am still bitter about the election of 2000. I still feel we didn't have a legitimate
president. George has done nothing but turn just
about every country against us. We do need a back
up system, because we don't need another repeat
of 2000. We were robbed, besides we need to do
away with the Electoral College. I think we are
smart enough to vote for our presidents. That way
it would be based on a popular vote instead of
criminals voting a corrupt politican in the white
house, kind of like what we got now!

[siddin-2009]

If you want the voting software to be done correctly use linux and make the project open source.

[sciencedork]

What about accessibility for disabled voters who wouldnt be able to vote on their own otherwise. I am sensitive to the security concerns and agree those issues are a major problem but there are other features of these machines that make them desirable. I found a cool website that gives you both sides of the debate www.votingmachinesprocon.org. The paper trail sounds like a smart idea as long as they make sure they are accessible to disabled voters.

[truemajority]

There is a long list of cases where these machines have *already* failed. Those who call this a partisan issue haven't noticed that the Maryland Governor calling for dumping his state's paperless system is a Republican.

There's an emergency bill in the Senate which would pay for the printing of backup paper ballots to be used in case of more problems like the ones in Maryland's primary where legal voters were turned away: http://action.truemajority.org/campaign/paper_ballot_c4/

[photolex]

The question shouldn't be, "Are voting machines reliable?" but are voting machines more reliable than what we've used before?

I think they are as reliable and as the technology improves, so will the validity of the results. Just remember one thing...user error. Every time we think we've made something idiot proof, God rolls out a better idiot.

[duffyn]

Huaaa... Democrats are going to clean up in the elections. People see what the current republicans are all about and, quite correctly, sick of it. Fraudulent election results are about the people running the paper or machines. If the people are honest and careful the results are fine. If they're not.. wel.....

[archangelric]

There have beeen report after report after report about these machines; and more specifically the software behind them.

Few people understand the issues; basically the hardware works,it counts 0's and 1's and that's it. Its all in the software.

Windows XP is supposed to be hack proof (or so Bill Gates & Company would have you believe) yet just this week another patch was rushed out to eliminate an issue in how images are processed, and a patch to the august patch that rendered some machines unusable (plus a warning that some people who applied the July patch would have to undo it to get the september patch of the august patch to work).

Billions of dollars are spent developing and maintaining Windows XP; mere millions on the election software, which is why there have beeen report after report after report about these machines; and more specifically the software behind them.

Get a clue; these things are going to be hacked even if they weren't originally designed specifically to be hacked, which they may have been; and they make it so much easier to steal an election.

By theway; I am a programmer, web designer, hardware & software consultant, tech support, etc. of 28 years. I have alittle experience in this.

[erwilso]

"ARE VOTING MACHINES RELIABLE ?"

answer: NO

[ozonmojo]

Democrats are going to lose the November,2006 elections. They are not going to capture the Senate or the House.So,to prepare the ground for that event the bogey of a" stolen election " is being revived onece again.This propaganda tactic has always stood them in good stead.