NC: Company seeks clarity on voting machine rules (proprietary software)

[Wilms]

Monday, November 14, 2005

Company seeks clarity on voting machine rules

By Mark Binker, Staff Writer

RALEIGH — Attorneys for a voting machine manufacturer have asked a state court to narrow a key provision in the rules governing those bidding on the chance to sell equipment to local elections boards .

“The concern was that we were being asked to provide something that was impossible to provide,” said Douglas Hanna, a lawyer at Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice working for manufacturer Diebold.

The company is trying to clarify the law rather than have a showdown with the state, Hanna said. But watchdogs who track problems related to voting machines say they are worried that if Diebold gets what it wants, the court will weaken North Carolina’s ability to dissect problems after an election mishap.

snip

Under those new rules, the state is seeking firms that produce machines meeting certain requirements — such as that computer scientists may examine them to make sure they work as expected.

The state will choose one or more companies from whom local elections boards can buy equipment. Under state rules, companies holding that contract must place “all software that is relevant to functionality, setup, configuration and operation of the voting system” in safekeeping so it may be examined should something go wrong. Diebold argues that the requirement is too broad.

According to Hanna, the company’s software runs using Microsoft’s Windows operating system . Diebold is worried state rules would require it to submit information related to Windows, something the company can’t legally do.

snip

Voting machine watchdogs are concerned that if Diebold is exempt from submitting the Windows code, it will set a dangerous precedent.

snip

If the state exempts third-party software from disclosure, voting machine vendors might be able to broker license agreements with other companies that allow them to exempt certain pieces of software from the safekeeping requirements, potentially hiding flaws from elections officials.

snip/more

http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051114/NEWSREC0101/511140308/1001/NEWSREC0201

[kster]

1. I know how to fix this problem

PAPER BALLOTS HAND COUNTED and recorded at the PRECINCT LEVEL.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

2. impossible for Diebold, but not for others

We will not be Diebolded.

We have filed a motion to narrow the scope of what the republican judge did.

Diebold is a chump, they have a microsoft operating system, and
also a bunch of other third party crap.

They might as well sell their GEMS program to "Katherine Blackwell Industries", and then re-license it again, and claim it is third party software and they can't turn over the source code.

Fortunately, there are other vendors who have their own operating systems.

It looks like something hinky is going on though,

We have a Diebold man overseeing the RFP process, and this same guy
who installed 22,000 Diebolds in Ga in 02 is going to help install
voting machines in NC in 06.

Bad news for Dems!

Why did the NC State Board of Elections choose this guy, eh?