Bev Harris: New Site For Diebold Voting Files
NEW DOWNLOAD SITE FOR DIEBOLD VOTING FILES
“Diebold: You are cordially invited to bite me. Bring it on. Make my
Wednesday, 03 September 2003(PDT)
By Bev Harris – blackboxvoting.org
This site is a mini-mini-mini version of the New Zealand download link for the Diebold files, which maxed out its bandwidth and is no longer available. On this site, Jim March boldly placed a lot of files for those who want to examine OUR voting system as manufactured by Diebold Election Systems.
Jim March certainly needs more citizens willing to mirror. If you are willing, make the choice thoughtfully and obtain advice from those you trust. It is possible that your decision would be considered an act of civil disobedience. That said, consider copying this post and the links it contains to send to everyone you know who wants a transparent, fair, and auditable voting system.
What you will find in these files should divest you, once and for all, of any notion that we should "trust" a system that does not allow us to verify our ballot, retains no evidence, and forbids us to examine it.
The Jim March download site includes the following:
- DOWNLOADABLE COMPONENTS
- GEMS INSTALLS
- BUG REPORTS
- DATA FILES
- OTHER FILES
- SECURITY TEST PROCEDURES (step by step)
- Analyzing The San Luis Obispo County Data File
March says that, by making CDs of this, you can visit your local reporters and elected officials and demonstrate the system to them personally. With that also, be advised that although what you will show them breaks the most basic FEC regulations and certainly violates everything our voting system, which is part of THE PUBLIC COMMONS, should be, realize that after you pick their jaws up off the floor you may face legal bullying or retaliation.
If that happens, have someone contact me and I'll engage in the most massive publicity that I can to alert the public of retaliatory efforts.
Appendix A: Legalities (read: why Diebold isn't going to sue me) by Jim March
First, let me explain that I fully "confess" that I am distributing Diebold copyrighted product on my website. And I was (and am) involved in the effort to strip the encryption from some of the ZIP archives downloaded from Diebold's FTP site.
So why am I not worried?
a) I believe all this falls under "fair use". I have a history of using the Public Records Act to expose government-related misconduct, corruption and general stupidity. See also:
http://www.equalccw.com/commiemommies.html (the first time my reporting made Matt Drudge's site)
...and other examples.
b) Voting is a highly "public" function, and public scrutiny over the election process is a VERY well established area of law. There have been two lower court decisions in favor of the secrecy of electronic voting systems but first, I believe those decisions were wrong and second, in those cases no specific allegations of misconduct were presented - only theoretical issues.
c) In Diebold's case, misconduct is very, VERY well established. Good God, where do we start?
· Diebold is supposed to be supplying security with their system - it's part of the contract for services, either implied, specific or in some cases, mandated by law. So they leave their FTP site totally wide open, only encrypt some files and the ones they do encrypt, they do so with ZIP encyption which is known to be flawed?
· Diebold grabbed elections data from 3:31pm on the DAY OF THE RACE in SLO County. If the data isn't public record, then what the hell were they doing with it?!
· California Penal Code 19205(c) says that the Secretary of State shall not approve voting systems that are "subject to tampering". GEMS doesn't even begin to qualify, once you know that MS-Access is a "hack tool". By withholding the info on grotesque security flaws via MS-Access, Diebold violated God only knows how many contracts plus that element of state law.
· I could go on, but you get the point.
d) The elements of "c" above lead to an "unclean hands" problem on Diebold's. In court, the term "unclean hands" applies to somebody who tries to get "justice" when they themselves are law-breakers. This is why a crack dealer can't sue his customers over failure to pay.
e) I hope they do sue me in civil court. The discovery process will be an absolute blast. Depositions will be even more fun.
f) They might convince the Feds to prosecute me criminally. Riiight. Let's see - will they be able to convince a jury that hey, this whole "democracy" thing is over-rated? Basically, prosecuting me for copyright issues and/or hacking under the DCMA would be much the same as the guy who sees a robber in a ski mask and packin' a shotgun rush into a bank, so he slashes the crook's tires - and gets prosecuted for vandalism. There's such thing as a "necessity defense" in criminal law. It applies in this case, in spades.
g) Yo Diebold: before you take me on, you should know what you're up against. Go here:
Pay particular attention to the downloadable video linked in that article. That's what you'll be facing in court.
h) I have friends with law degrees. Lots of 'em. Scads. And they're gun-rights lawyers, which in California means "battle hardened sumbiches fighting behind enemy lines".
i) Special message to Diebold: you are cordially invited to bite me. Bring it on. Make my day.
background and live news links on this news subject see also
Scoop's Special Feature – A Very American
Pre-Order your copy of Black Box Voting today…
For more background and live news links on this news subject see also Scoop's Special Feature – A Very American Coup…