pressinfo@diebold.com wrote:
In-Reply-To: <20040831203815.13871.qmail@www.securityfocus.com>
Diebold strongly refutes the existence of any "back doors" or "hidden codes" in
its GEMS software. These inaccurate allegations appear to stem from those not familiar with the
product, misunderstanding the purpose of legitimate structures in the database. These structures
are well documented and have been reviewed (including at a source code level) by independent
testing authorities as required by federal election regulations.
In addition to the facts stated above, a paper and an electronic record of all cast ballots are retrieved from each individual voting machine following an election. The results from each individual machine are then tabulated, and thoroughly audited during the standard election canvass process. Once the audit is complete, the official winners are announced. Any alleged changes to a vote count in the election management software would be immediately discovered during this audit process, as this total would not match the true official total tabulated from each machine.
You might have a little credibility if the back door hadn't been
demonstrated already on "Topic A With Tina Brown" (Howard Dean as guest
host). Maybe in your mind being able to rig a vote count qualifies as
"legitimate structures"? From your CEO:
"...[I am] committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the
president."
But, I guess I'm just a paranoid, tin foil hat wearing conspiracy
theorist...
--
Marvin Keith Bellamy
Software Engineer
Innovision Corporation
913.438.3200
