Diebold Rebrands What No One Wants

Irvu writes "Diebold has apparently failed in their bid to sell their tainted elections systems unit. Unable to find a buyer the CEO of Diebold promised that the system will be run more 'openly and independently.' To prove that they are serious, they renamed it. Diebold Election Systems is now Premiere Election Solutions. They still sell GEMS, AccuVote OS and the ever-unpopular AccuVote-TSX which performed so disastrously in California's Top-to-Bottom Review under the same names. Apparently their rebranding effort only goes so far."

Re:Why can't they have the people who make there A

[Anonymous Coward]

When your ATM gets scammed: All you lose is money.
When your voting system gets scammed: You lose your rights.

Putting frosting on a turd....

[EmbeddedJanitor]

doesn't change it into chocolate cake!

They're looking at a different market.

[khasim]

With a bank, if you get the numbers wrong, you lose that bank as a client FOREVER.

With an election, if you get the number wrong, you have a politician who will be your friend for life.

Think about it. They can handle billions of dollars, but they can't keep a million votes straight? At some point you realize that it isn't incompetence. It's their goal.

Re:Diebold and Microsoft

[pembo13]

Microsoft has a stronger marketing department.

Re:Why can't they have the people who make there A

[infonography]

Because the money is in making it NOT work right.

voting machines are unfit for public voting

[quitte]

Voting machines as they are are pretty much as good as they can get. There is no way a Compuiter could ever be trusted to do exactly what it is expected to do, and no way to be 100% sure it has not been tempered with. Those machines will always be unfit for public voting. As a voter I have several rights that a machine can never provide. I'm guaranteed by law that my vote is secret. But it has been shown that the electromagnetic radiation of voting machines can be measured accurately enough to draw some conclusions about what has been voted. Also I have the right to know how the voting works. Everybody can understand how counting votes with pen and paper works. Understanding a voting machine is pretty much impossible without a CS degree. Even if the sourcecode for both the hardware and Software was available pretty much nobody can tell if the machine actually does what it claims to do. Also there is hardly any chance to get an actual Rom dump to compare the sources you are looking at with the code that is running on the computer.

Re:They're looking at a different market.

[daveschroeder]

The billions of dollars are trackable, accountable, and attributable.

The millions of votes are supposed to be secret, anonymous, and unique.

Tell me you don't see a difference with a straight face.

(And hey: if you want to believe that every electronic election is rigged, no matter how eventually open source, now matter how eventualy trackable by paper-trail, etc., be my guest. Keep in mind that most of the electronic voting solutions were the result of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which was supposed to address the alleged and/or real problems and unfairness of 2000...)

Re:voting machines are unfit for public voting

[Sigmalmtd]

I don't really know how to respond to this, other than that I am disappointed for your lack of open-mindedness towards voting machines. Electronic voting technology is an active area of research: See http://accurate-voting.org/ [accurate-voting.org] for one example. Are voting machines fit for general use now? Absolutely not. But they continue to get better, as more and more research is being devoted to this hot topic.

All of the issues that you discussed can be subverted with better software, and more secure hardware. For instance, many people have suggested the use of TPM chips in voting machines to attempt to prevent software tampering. Teams of experts can validate source code and prove that it does what it's supposed to - I understand that you'd like to be able to validate it yourself, but the more open the source is, the more people that can look at it and can raise a red flag if something is wrong.

It's a shame that so many counties have poured money into machines like the flawed Diebold and iVotronic systems, because it means we may not see upgrades to more secure, and accurate systems for some time. However, pen and paper has its flaws as well. Voting machines have a lot of potential to fix the problems with both pen and paper, and the machines used today. What we need from the Government is more attention and action to these problems - audits and source code reviews should not be simply passed on as what seems to be happening in Sarasota, FL. What we need from members of the public, like yourself, is to not turn a blind eye to the possibilities, but to believe that researchers are doing their best to bring more secure voting machines to use.

This was not intended to get voting machines back

[Wuhao]

This was not a strategy to get the voting machines back into play in the places which rejected them. Diebold is a very old company going back into the 19th century, and was until relatively recently a very well established and trusted name in security equipment. The Diebold Elections Systems division has not only failed to produce reliable products, but has garnered enormous bad press which has reflected extremely negatively upon that name. Regardless of what their true motives are with Diebold Election Systems, I think everyone can see why any rational executive at Diebold would see the need to protect the Diebold name. A good name is one of the greatest assets a company in any industry can have, and especially so in security, where trust comes grudgingly. If Diebold seems incompetent, possibly malicious, with its election systems, why would you, the bank manager, trust them to build your ATM machines?

Calling them Premier Election Systems does not undo the damage that's been done, but it does help deflect future damages. Any attempt to recertify the machines under the new name is probably something they still would have done under the old name.

That doesn't make the machines any less awful. It doesn't absolve Diebold of the responsibility for what it has done, nor does it mean that their ATM machines are any more trustworthy now. If I were the bank manager, I probably still would not buy their machines. But, if we are going to criticize the company for its incompetence, let us at least criticize them for the incompetencies which they demonstrate -- not ones which we misinterpret into their strategies.

Re:Have to go by the track record

[Anonymous Coward]

how the fuck does where a man sticks his dick have any kind of relevance on his competence in country running?

if a guy makes good leadership decisions we shouldn't be judging him on sex. shit, we shouldn't even want to know about who he fucks! bob my accountant could be gay for all i know, i still appreciate he's the best man to do my tax.

personally, i'd prefer a well-laid president. probably start less wars in an effort to enhance his apparently lacking masculinity. maybe we should shout bush a hooker - 'y'know, on reflection, maybe we should just not shoot them quite so much and be friendly and perhaps they'll like us.. maybe invasion isn't the best way to say i like and respect your nation.. whew, what was i getting so excited about? here i was thinking there was this axis of evil and all it was was the fact i hadn't gotten laid in five years!'

sheesh..

Re:Get out the kiwi!

[freedom_india]

Spraying Britney Perfume on a turd does not hide its smell.
Rebranding was a crime in early 1800s. It should be a crime today and Diebold criminally convicted on livestock rebranding.

Re:They're looking at a different market.

[The One and Only]

And hey: if you want to believe that every electronic election is rigged, no matter how eventually open source, now matter how eventualy trackable by paper-trail, etc., be my guest.

You do realize that none of those terms describes the Diebold system, right?

Keep in mind that most of the electronic voting solutions were the result of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which was supposed to address the alleged and/or real problems and unfairness of 2000...

You say that as if federal legislation could never lead to horrible, unforeseen consequences.

Smells Like Republicans!

[posterlogo]

Never forget, the Diebold CEO is a major contributor to Bush. This is the man who said "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president" during the last campaign presidential, and incredible statement from someone who makes voting machines.

They will rebrand, reorganize, etc., but in the end, don't forget their loyalty is to one political party. That is where the lobbying money goes, so you know who to blame whenever there's an e-voting fiasco.

Re:Auditing votes

[BitchKapoor]

It ought to be possible ( using PGP ) to have the vote counters return to you a code that is your vote encrypted. Only you can decrypt it. If it is not correct, you can go public.

No, that's not good enough—even you shouldn't be able to prove you voted a certain way unless the ballot itself is checked. Otherwise the person to whom you sold your vote/who bullied your vote out of you can just ask for your encrypted vote code.

Re:voting machines are unfit for public voting

[quitte]

wow. another reason I'm glad not to be a U.S. citizen. It keeps amazing me how the U.S. lacks so many of what I consider core democratic rights.

who says ATMs are all that great?

[JimBobJoe]

Why can't they have the people who make there ATMs work on the voting systems?

The elections machines have been subjected to numerous public tests, the results of which are available to everyone. The ATMs have not. We are told that the ATMs are dependable and secure, but I don't think we really know and I haven't seen much from the banking industry that implies that they are somehow all that much more sophisticated computer security wise than anyone else.

I believe the main reason that ATMs aren't a security issue is because it'd take too long to stand there to hack the machine and the payoff isn't all that great. You can rob a bank in a minute with a gun and get a few grand.

Re:They're looking at a different market.

[archeopterix]

And hey: if you want to believe that every electronic election is rigged, no matter how eventually open source, now matter how eventualy trackable by paper-trail, etc., be my guest.

"Every" is a very strong word, but I'd say that it is very hard to get an electronic system right.

Open source? Sure - but how do I know that the machine is actually running the code I reviewed? Trackable by paper trail? Good, but you need to: 1) let the voters check their part of the paper trail 2) have someone check the paper trail with the electronic record. If you believe that this is not effectively doubling the traditional ballot, then be my guest.

Re:This was not intended to get voting machines ba

[erroneus]

That's not only misleading, but VERY misleading. Brand names, especially very successful brand names, do not get removed just because a patent expires. NutraSweet Company is still an active, profitable and majority supplier of aspartame. They have every incentive to put the brand on foods that contain it...except that people know to avoid the red and white twirl mark just as readily as they avoid the jolly roger symbol that mark poisons.