A group of Californians has filed a lawsuit in state court against voting machine vendor Diebold, in advance of the March 2 primary election.
The complaint asks the court to order Diebold to do three main things: (1) to refrain from further violations of state election laws and regulations, such as installing uncertified software for use in elections, (2) to implement the stopgap security measures recommended by the Raba report, in time for the March 2 primary election, and (3) to implement the longterm security measures recommended by the Raba report or else to withdraw the Diebold systems from use.
I am troubled by the increased chatter these recent voter machine challenges have had on the public acceptance of electronic voting systems, generally.
I can envision secure electronic voting systems, but it seems there is a growing public perception that paper is necessary and any electronically-based system is inherently untrustworthy. I hope I am wrong.
According to Jim Wasserman, writing for the Associated Press, “Judge Rejects Calif. Voting Challenge” (Newsday):
In paragraph 49, the complaint specifies:
And in the next paragraph, 50, the complaint notes MITM vulnerabilities.
If the telephone systems were to go down in these counties shortly before the polls close, would this foil MITM attackers?