EXCLUSIVE: Voting Machine Company Threatens Princeton Profs

[BradBlog]

EXCLUSIVE: Sequoia Voting Systems Threatens Princeton Computer Scientists with Legal Action if they Carry Out NJ Commissioned Analysis of the Company's Touch-Screen Voting Machines
VP Edwin Smith Warns Scientists, in Email Obtained by The BRAD BLOG, of Plans to Take 'Appropriate Steps to Protect Against Publication of Software, Its Behavior or Reports Regarding Same'

ALSO: Company Website of One of Nation's Largest Voting Machine Vendors Refers to 'Democrat' (sic) Party in Explanation for Recent Primary Election Failure...

Sequoia Voting Systems has sent a legal threat to Princeton University computer science professors Ed Felten and Andrew Appel warning them of legal action should they proceed with an analysis of New Jersey's touch-screen voting machines as unanimously recommended last week by an association representing election clerks across the state.

The recommendation for an independent probe comes on the heels of failures in the company's voting systems across at least six New Jersey counties during the recent Super Tuesday Presidential Primaries there.

In a terse email sent last Friday, obtained today by The BRAD BLOG, Sequoia's Edwin Smith, Vice-President of Compliance/Quality/Certification, warns the university academics that the company has "retained counsel to stop any infringement of our intellectual properties, including any non-compliant analysis."

"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 threatens.

The email from Smith to Felten and Appel is posted in full at the link below.

Sequoia has good reason to be concerned about what may come of an analysis by professors Felten and/or Appel. Both of them have previously detailed major voting machine security flaws, and the ability to easily hack into such systems made by both Sequoia and Diebold Election Systems...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5814

[gristy]

1. Do you think they have any case at all Brad?

[BradBlog]

8. If they do, I can't imagine what it is...

If the state sanctions and commissions an analysis of the voting machines they've been paid millions of dollars for, I can't see how any legitimate court would disallow them from doing due-diligence to assure the machines work as they are supposed to.

Then again, we seem to have a lot of illegitimate courts who side with corporations over the people. So yeah, I'm sure they'll do everything they can to make sure nobody hears about the crappy secret software they use in our public election system. Particularly when they've been shown to have defrauded states and counties around the country for years.

They've largely gotten away with it, because the states/counties have allowed themselves to become so entrenched and reliant on the voting machine companies, that they've become scared to death to take them on in court. After all, they are still relying on them for their next election.

It's a disgraceful, self-destructive cycle, but that's where we are for the time being.

I suspect, however, this effort at intimidating the scientists will backfire. Big time.

[bleever]

2. I love the smell of SLAPP suits in the morning.

It smells like victory.

[Botany]

25. Please sue ... oh please sue

I know some lawyers who would love to take this case.

**************

BTW Did you see this?

County's voting machines examined........Thank You Jennifer Brunner!

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news...


THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
When Jennifer Brunner cast her vote last fall, she is certain she saw something so odd on her touch-screen voting machine that it prompted a state criminal investigation into the Franklin County Board of Elections.

At least 15 of the county's electronic machines are under double-lock at an Alum Creek warehouse. It is being treated as a crime scene.

County elections officials asked the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation to seize the machines during the investigation by Attorney General Marc Dann and forensics consultants.

In all, the state is expected to spend as much as $48,000 to divine what Brunner saw -- or didn't see. Investigators already have found that many of the county's voting machines weren't tested before the November election. And a function that tracked changes to the machines was purposely turned off.

Brunner isn't the average voter. As secretary of state, she is in charge of making sure Ohio's elections are properly conducted.

[troubleinwinter]

3. "We will also take appropriate steps to protect against any publication of... its behavior" WTF?

[havocmom]

5. If they don't want their software examined, they shouldn't sell it to count our votes

in OUR democracy. Corporate secrets/profits do not take precedence over OUR DEMOCRACY

[troubleinwinter]

11. Believe me, I know that and spend time in the Election Reform forum.

What is ultra-extra-maxi creepy is that they don't want their "behavior" discussed or examined! WTF?! I think every aspect of their behavior should be examined closely. Peculiar that they specifically point it out, eh?

[Kitty Herder]

20. My thoughts exactly? WTF? nt

[tomp]

24. behavior of the software=perfomance of software, i think, nt

[Hekate]

4. The evildoers will not go down without a nasty fight, will they? nt

:kick: :popcorn:

Hekate

[lonestarnot]

6. So let 'em, but proceed with the disclosure. When the truth is revealed they'll be pissing in the

wind. Won't ACLU defend the suit? Answers cost less to file than Complaints neener neener neener.

[MaryCeleste]

7. Legally they may have a point

A lot depends on what NJ contracted for. DMCA is never the friend of the purchaser.

That said, the profs need to get indemnification from the state and then go at it.

[lutherj]

9. You think maybe they're worried what a couple of Princeton caliber

professors of computer science might uncover in the software?

[alfredo]

10. Assholes

[crimsonblue]

12. Ok, this just makes no sense..

I took a couple programming classes in college, and I know for a fact that it is pretty damn easy to create a GUI that records votes easily, effectively, and securely. It is not fucking brain science, guys. This problem of shitty computer voting systems arose from the stupidity and frugality of the States. The Feds could have hired Google or Microsoft to develop a voting system, and it would be ready in less than a year. Unfortunately, I believe that Congress made it law that voting system code was private-source (it was at least being heavily considered), so this may give Seqouia a leg to stand on. Thanks to our boy king's relm for yet another 21st technological wonder, which goes along fantastically with the planning for the Iraq War, and the boy king's genius plan to help America by giving people a tax-return loan (hardly anyone realizes that these have to be repaid next year)

[hunter]

16. The basic problem with computers is that they can be programmed to do anything.

Stealing votes? No problem.

Securing a general purpose computer is not easy, especially one that is designed from the ground up to be "upgradable."

A computer that can be upgraded for honest purposes can also be upgraded for dishonest purposes, even seruptitiously by means of computer viruses, sleight of hand tricks, etc.

Nobody really knows what's going on inside the computer -- the process in no way emulates putting your paper ballot in a secure ballot box.

[Canuckistanian]

32. The problem is, ANYTHING could be happening behind that screen

While you're happily voting away, the processor could be:

a)Ignoring your vote and be programmed to provide a pre-determined vote count at the end of the day

b)Accepting your vote and "flipping" the choices to the opposite party

c)"Malfunctioning" EXACTLY WHEN totals need to be taken.

OR

d)Any possible combination of the above scenarios.

[Norrin Radd]

13. kr

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

14. We have nothing to fear but fear itself.

...oh, and the truth, should it be discovered...

[suffragette]

15. Sequoia is making the clearest case possible

for why the voting process and all its mechanisms need to be open, public, transparent and accountable to the citizens by their arrogance in insisting that their closed, private, and hidden system not be accessible or accountable to the people.

Ironic, isn't it?

This attempt at intimidation reeks of fear on their part. They clearly know and are all but admitting that their system can't bear the scrutiny of impartial analysis.

[Kurovski]

17. K&R. (nt)

[Senator]

18. K&R

[Perry Logan]

19. I dream of a day when our votes are counted by wildly partisan left-wing companies.

[KansDem]

26. Hey, I think you have a bumper-sticker idea here!

:thumbsup:

[loudsue]

27. LOL! :) From your keyboard

to Gawd's ears. :hi:

:rofl:

[NoFederales]

21. Privatized Voting--Brought To You Via The Neo Politicos formerly

politically correctly known as fascist control, but all Law Abiding Citizens who turn in Free Thinkers will be rewarded and thanked as valued members of The New Republican Society.............

I hope Felten and Appel proceed undeterred by these criminal vendors who are stealing our votes and destroying our Republic.

NoFederales

[mainegreen]

22. New Jersey's Governer can just give them retroactive immunity with a signing statement.

:sarcasm:

[jtrockville]

23. A shining example of privatization at it's finest. Bah. nt

[BeFree]

28. Ya know?

There have been more solid investigations of hamburger meat than there ever has been of voting machines. And that's not saying much.

Even tho public funds are used to purchase the VCMs - Vote Counting Machines - no one has ever been able to look under the hood. No One.

The only good tiding in this report - thanks Brad - is that some election officials are now beginning to shit bricks over the VCMs.

[Supersedeas]

29. open, democratic elections -- not in these corporate $tate$ of 'merikkka

[burythehatchet]

30. "non-compliant analysis", George Orwell would be proud.

[electropop]

31. "non-compliant analysis?" What a load of crap!

Why in hell would anybody "comply" with the ravings of a criminal corporation? It's Sequoia that's non-compliant - with the law and with any reasonable standard of voting systems.

The auditors should immediately begin their own suit against Sequoia, using this letter as evidence of attempted extortion.

[santamargarita]

33. Screw These Fascist Pigs - Do It Anyway!

K&R

[peacetalksforall]

34. Isn't this more proof that hte corporations own the country? Or are trying?i

[Elspeth]

35. Threatening academics?

Sounds like a shakedown.

[Kurovski]

36. Kick. (nt)