Forwarded from: Dave Dittrich <dittrich (at) u.washington.edu> InfoSec News wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/15ohio.html > > By Bob Driehaus > The New York Times > December 15, 2007 > > CINCINNATI - All five voting systems used in Ohio ...have critical > flaws... > At polling stations, teams working on the study were able to pick > locks to access memory cards and use hand-held devices to plug false > vote counts into machines. At boards of election, they were able to > introduce malignant software into servers. > > Ms. Brunner proposed replacing all of the states voting machines, > including the touch-screen ones used in more than 50 of Ohios 88 > counties. So when will we see a call for a refund on the millions of dollars spent on those highly flawed systems after the 2000 election? Or at minimum a legislatively mandated discount that will cap the profits on the next generation? When there is a shortage of funds available for computer security R&D, its a shame to see orders of magnitude more money spent on systems that would have benefited from the R&D had that been done first, not after the problems are discovered. Do we always have to do things backwards? Sigh... -- Dave Dittrich Information Assurance Researcher, dittrich (at) u.washington.edu The iSchool http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich University of Washington PGP key http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/pgpkey.txt Fingerprint FE97 0C57 0843 F3EB 49A1 0CD0 8E0C D0BE C838 CCB5 __________________________________________________________________ Visit InfoSec News http://www.infosecnews.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed Dec 19 2007 - 22:26:40 PST