|
|
E-vote systems certifier
de-certified
We can't prove anything, so neither can the Feds
By
Thomas C Greene in Dublin →
More by this author
Jan-05-07
Free White Paper Download - Data Protection Tips for SMBs
The leading certifier of US electronic voting systems, Colorado outfit
Ciber, Inc., is no longer permitted to issue certifications, after federal
investigators discovered appallingly haphazard testing regimes, the New York
Times reports.
Ciber, which certifies the majority of US election devices, was unable to
document how it supposedly tested the machines for accuracy and security.
Due to the oddities of US elections regulations, no government agency is
assigned this role; rather, device manufacturers pay whoever they wish to
rubber-stamp their kit.
The US federal Election Assistance Commission began oversight only in July
2006, and immediately found problems with Ciber's records, but did not act
until recently, presumably in fear that the November election results would
be brought into question. Ciber has been barred from issuing certifications
until it can demonstrate proper quality controls and documentation of its
"work".
The company says it's on the mend, however, and assures investors that it
will win federal accreditation this month. Voters may be less optimistic.
While Ciber may not be allowed to certify machines until the Commission is
satisfied with its recordkeeping, nothing is yet being done to re-examine
the machines it "passed" without adequate controls.
And nothing is being done to bring transparency to the business of voting
machine testing and certification, although this is perhaps the most
important element of any trustworthy scheme. A good model can be found in
the Nevada Gaming Commission, which investigates even the smallest
complaints with Las Vegas's electronic slot machines (among many other
things). If these machines were certified by anyone the makers wished to
hire, the public would soon mobilize in protest, and casinos would lose
significant revenue from their most blatant mechanisms of mass theft.
And yet there is no popular outcry against the lack of accountability and
transparency in the e-voting racket. It's interesting to note that the
public is clearly less concerned with the integrity of its election
equipment than it is with a one-armed bandit in a Vegas hotel. ®
Are You Eligible for
Stimulus Money?
Get the newsletter
|