分享這篇文章： 這些像與社會按書簽的站點連接，讀者能分享和發現新的網頁。

不合格的機器和一樣用於Pennslvania帳簿的那些

曲頭釘BLOG 對普林斯頓電腦科學教授的美國加州紅杉表決系統』法律威脅和

新澤西 競選官員明顯地有他們的意欲的作用。 暴力電子郵件送了到愛德Felten教授，并且安德魯Appel由給聯合縣，新澤西，幹事Joanne Rajoppi的二頁信件明顯地伴隨，在2月5日超級星期二競選以後在美國加州紅杉的AVC好處觸摸屏幕選票計算機最初發現帳簿失敗。 同一個錯誤在至少其他五個縣隨後被發現了。

Mercer 縣 幹事Paula Sollami-Covello告訴新澤西時代美國加州紅杉的決定阻攔對它的觸摸屏幕選票計算機的獨立分析沒有道理，如果企業確信他們適當地運作。

“I think it’s unfortunate that they’re not letting an independent investigation take place,” Sollami-Covello tells the paper this morning. “They should have no problem with having a third party investigate the product if they are confident in their product.”

Another Mercer County, NJ, official sent a letter to the state Attorney General criticizing Sequoia’s bizarre explanation for failures discovered in the systems following state’s recent Primary Election, characterizing what he describes as the company’s “strange, confusing solution.” He said the company’s explanation for the problem, which succeeded in blaming voters and poll workers as usual, was based on a “bizarre scenario, with no cited evidence or testimony” to back it up. . .

Amazingly (or perhaps, not so much at this point), Union County’s attorneys folded to the pressure from the company, which claimed that Election Officials in NJ — who spent millions on the voting systems — are not legally allowed to examine them independently because “the voting machine software is a Sequoia ‘trade secret’ and cannot be handed over to any third-party.”

Fear of a lawsuit from Sequoia, which will also control the state’s elections in an upcoming June primary, as well as the November general election, has led to county attorneys backing down from their plans for the time being, unless the state AG jumps in to take action.

In the threatening email from Smith to the

Princeton professors sent last Friday, the company executive threatened legal action if a “non-compliant analysis” of their voting systems was carried out. “We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of Sequoia software, its behavior, reports regarding same or any other infringement of our intellectual property,” Smith warned. . .

A Sequoia executive, Edwin Smith, put Union County Clerk Joanne Rajoppi on notice that an independent analysis would violate the licensing agreement between his firm and the county. In a terse two-page letter, Smith also argued the voting machine software is a Sequoia “trade secret” and cannot be handed over to any third-party.

Rutgers University law professor Penny Venetis stated what should be quite obvious in the Star-Ledger article today. . . “We shouldn’t have a corporation dictating how elections are run in the state,” Venetis said. “If an elected official believes there was an anomaly and the matter has to be investigated, then the official should be able to consult with computer experts without interference.”

Livermore Laboratory’s computer scientist David Jefferson jumped in to comment on our story yesterday, which included the full threatening email sent to the Princeton Professors, in order to note the importance of such a test being carried out on New Jersey’s Sequoia machines prior to the use of the very same systems next month in

Pennsylvania.

“We have only a matter of weeks before the Pennsylvania primary in which the same machines will be used in Philadelphia, and only a few months more until the general election,”

Jefferson wrote. “This bug (and any others discovered) must be fixed.”

USA News Voting Section has more related reports

Help keep RINF going..

Comment on 'VOTING COMPANY BULLIES ELECTION OFFICIALS' :

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Related News:

California Limits E-Voting

E-voting hacks to get Capitol Hill spotlight

Most vote machines lose test to hackers

Ohio voting machines have critical flaws

20 percent of election printouts were unreadable