ES&S Gave California E-Voting Machines That Weren't Certified

from the and-the-hits-keep-coming dept

Wed, Aug 22nd 2007 6:55am — Mike Masnick

Well, the hits keep for Election Systems & Software (ES&S). The company was already facing some controversy over the fact that its e-voting machines time stamped the ballots in a way that could reveal how voters voted, and now California's Secretary of State has discovered that the company gave the state e-voting machines for the last election that were not certified. California had certified one model of ES&S machines, but the company sold a different model to five counties. The state is now looking to fine ES&S. Of course, ES&S is also the company that originally refused to hand over its source code to the state, but eventually did so along with a threatening letter about how it would hold the Secretary of State personally responsible for any trade secrets that leaked. Trade secrets like how their machines accidentally were found to count votes in triplicate? ES&S, by the way, is also the company whose machines were used in the Florida election where many votes went missing, and it was later discovered that the company had passed around memos about their buggy software that could have caused the problem. It's also the company that had an employee come here to Techdirt and post a bunch of angry comments about how e-voting machines were perfectly safe and went through more than enough testing. Apparently not in California. Update: As pointed out in the comments, the company also was just caught failing to disclose foreign manufacturing partners to federal agencies, as it's required to do. ES&S's response on being caught? Shrugged it off as an oversight that they would fix. It appears that the company doesn't seem to worry about getting punished for all its mistakes.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: california, e-voting
Companies: es&s

17 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Rational Beaver, 22 Aug 2007 @ 7:52am

They're also the company that failed to disclose their foreign manufacturing facility (apparently a 'sweatshop' in Manila) to the Federal Election Assistance Commission: Wired story

Sucks to be them right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew, 22 Aug 2007 @ 7:58am

Not much of a suprise!
We have the ex-Diebold employee who sold machines to our county as our Registrar of Voters in San Diego. Why not just sell us machines that do the voting for us!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SPR, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:14am

Electronic Voting Machines
It is obvious that both Diebold and ES&S do not take our electoral process seriously. We need to ban their products from any and all governmental process and/or participation, present and future. This most definitely includes making campaign donations and participating in the lobbying process. Their interest is in undermining our elections and subverting for their own ends, or for the ends of their greatest funding source, our elections.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Smacky Mouse, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:31am

Voting Machines
I'm sorry, but I disagree that the companies are the problem. The problem lies with the government that accepts this kind of behaviour, time and time again. A government that ignores the negative reports that keep flowing in. Address that issue, and this problem goes away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:31am

Does it matter if they are 'certified' or not? In my experience, even with people, that rarely makes a difference. Only experience and time-tested mechanisms seem to really work. A 'certification' is only as good (or bad) as the one certifying.

I certainly agree with SPR also:

"t is obvious that both Diebold and ES&S do not take our electoral process seriously."

I think that really sums it up. But I would also add, that our politicians don't take it seriously either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased), 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:32am

How much is your vote worth?
The fine could be up to $14.7M. The estimated (legal) population of California in 2006 was almost 36.5M according to the U.S. Census Bureau. With a generous 40% voter turnout we are looking at approximately 14.6M votes. So far your vote is worth $1. There were 14 counties that used the ES&S machines, I don't know which 5 were sold the uncertified machines but the 14 counties included San Francisco, Sacramento, and Santa Barbara. I would guess that approximately 4M people had their votes compromised, figuring there are probably about 4,000 votes per machine. So the price of your vote is $3.68. Remember, that is if they get the 'up to' fine. So a small portion of my campaign contributions ($15M) can pay ES&S to pepper some rigged machines throughout. I win the election and ES&S will get a profit depending on how well they can influence their former salesperson in the Secretary of State position to drop some of the fines. The system does work!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:36am

I'm sorry, but I disagree that the companies are the problem.

I would kinda disagree there - I mean the NTSB is the government agency for the auto safety, but if a car maker makes a dangerous piece of junk, it's not necessarily the government's fault, particularly when the company says it's "safe" or "secure".

But personally, I don't think computers will ever really be "secure" any more than a car is ever really "safe" - in spite of airbags, seatbelts - moving 2000+ lbs of steel at 70 mph - well accidents are bound to happen. And... Computer code is bound to be bugged, hacked, or both.

Although, yes - I do agree in principle, really. I'd put most of the blame on the Government and Media - for *telling* us they are secure and safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Nonny Moose, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:36am

Great googly mooglies! And I came >THIS
I came even closer than that to working for Adelphia back before the Rigas boys got caught with their hands in the honeypot.

Duckin' bullets left and right, folks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Nonny Moose, 22 Aug 2007 @ 8:37am

phew!
(so much for preview...trying again)
Great googly mooglies! And I came !THIS! close to working for these clowns a few years back. Well, more than a "few" by now, but you get the picture.

I came even closer than that to working for Adelphia back before the Rigas boys got caught with their hands in the honeypot.

Duckin' bullets left and right, folks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Man, 22 Aug 2007 @ 9:25am

Why computers
Not everything needs to be computerized. We only vote every two years and only a small percentage actually votes. Lets just vote the old fasioned way and save a ton of tax payer money. Well I guess we wont actally save any tax payer money, but if they use the voter machine money on some other useless waste of time, maybe they won't try to raise taxes to do both waste of time and money projects.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RandomThoughts, 22 Aug 2007 @ 10:13am

Its government work, you expect quality? FBI database (its up to system 3 now, right?), the Big Dig (40% more to fix leaks), is it surprising that companies deliver faulty products?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Aug 2007 @ 4:31pm
  
  Re: Its government work, you expect quality?
  In fact, I do expect quality - and no, I'm not naive.
  
  I'm just tired of listeninng to that "government can't do anything right" myth.
  
  Sure they screw some things up; but our gov does an immense number of things wery well indeed. So well, in fact, that you're not even aware of them - until the occasional screwup happens.
  
  And I suppose business never screws anything up? PuhLeeze!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Fascinatin', 29 Aug 2007 @ 1:14pm
    
    Re: Re: Its government work, you expect quality?
    Actually the government does only one thing well: it is beyond compare in its ability to kill people. There is nothing else that it attempts to do that could conceivably be considered well done. From the 'war on poverty' to 'health and human services' to 'social security' to the 'war on drugs' and on and on ad infinitum the government's record of abysmal failure is unparalelled. Only in bombing people back to the stone age does it show any actual talent. If you can call it that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan, 22 Aug 2007 @ 10:15am

confused
i agree with the man on this one. electronics just open up the system to so many other problems. im surprised a congress that is so computer illiterate ever even allowed electronic voting machines. My big question is what makes it so hard to write the code for a voting machine? it seems like a really simple task. how can these big companies get it so wrong?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Casper, 22 Aug 2007 @ 10:33am

Electronics are fine..
I have to disagree with comments 10 and 12. Electronic voting is not inherently a problem. We have million of electronic and computerized devices that function 100% of the time for decades at a time. The problem is complication. These companies are trying to do far more then in necessary for accepting a vote.

If more people operated on the KISS idea (keep it simple stupid), this wouldn't really be a problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Dissident, 22 Aug 2007 @ 11:03am

About the triplicate votes...
So... this is how Mr Chavez of Venezuela gets his landslides! Thanks guys you made my day. All hail low-tech paper votes!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2007 @ 6:22pm

It appears that the company doesn't seem to worry about getting punished for all its mistakes.
Especially since the rewards seem to be greater that the punishment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]