# Does blackboxvoting.org have hard evidence fraud took place in Tuesday's election? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 5, 2004, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182 "2004-11-05T14:29:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/101 "2004-11-12T19:44:38Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > All good points. What I can’t assume is integrity on the part of the election officials- somehow Katherine Harris’ performance in 2000 did not fill me with confidence that Florida officials are unbiased arbiters of fairness. You and I can’t break into the PCs from here, but I for one would be surprised if all the PCs were babysat all during the election. Well, but thats the crux of it…were the election officials (which were, I though, supposed to be bipartisan) trustworthy? Because if they weren’t, then its a moot point anyway isn’t it? And if they were, then I have to lean towards them doing their jobs correctly (i.e. they WERE supposed to keep an eye, or ‘babysit’ those machines to prevent physical security breaches) unless there is some evidence they didn’t. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > Better technical solutions exist. A competent Oracle database staff could have made the database infinitely more secure and enforce logging of any changes to the data. Well, I happen to agree that better technical solutions exist. I’m unsure WHY some of the decisions were made on these things and would be interested in seeing what the RFP was sent out (and the scope of work, technical and monetary requirements, etc) to the various vendors originally bidding these products…and WHO put out said RFP. I’m all for closely evaluating this system and coming up with solutions to fix some of the perceived or real problems…and not just because my own company could bid on such a contract either. 🙂 -XT ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/102 "2004-11-12T19:49:08Z")
BTW, FWIW, my guess is that it was a state agency that put out the RFP, that they didn’t define their requirements well (probably not really understanding all of the ramifications that have been brought up since), and that they went with the lowest bidder, instead of the best technical design or the one with the most secure features. Regrettable (burns me up when WE lose contracts to someone who underbids us but has a less viable technical solution) but its how our current system works. One need not go into elaborate conspiracy theories when simple incompetence and government bureaucracy will suffice as an explanation. -XT ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/103 "2004-11-12T19:52:42Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Better technical solutions exist. A competent Oracle database staff could have made the database infinitely more secure and enforce logging of any changes to the data. Windows would log the time that the data was changed (but not the specific changes). ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/104 "2004-11-12T20:04:30Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > You and I can’t break into the PCs from here, but I for one would be surprised if all the PCs were babysat all during the election. Physical access to the machines can be denied by keeping them in a locked room – no need for a dedicated babysitter, though the presence of Republican and Democratic watchdogs certainly didn’t hurt. The door to this locked room would presumably be in near eyesight to at least some of the poll workers (if not right behind them … I’m imagining my own polling site). ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/105 "2004-11-12T20:04:45Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > Windows would log the time that the data was changed (but not the specific changes). But in one of the hacking demos, they simply deleted the log file. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/106 "2004-11-12T20:07:30Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > But in one of the hacking demos, they simply deleted the log file. More precision is needed here – what “log file”? The GEMS log file? There’s no Windows “log file” to deal with. Getting rid of the GEMS log file wouldn’t affect Windows’ “Date Modified” timestamp, in any case. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/107 "2004-11-12T20:19:39Z")
Can you fix the election by hacking into just one of these PC’s, or would you have to hack into every PC at every precinct that has one? You can’t fix an election by fudging one precinct’s numbers. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/108 "2004-11-12T20:22:13Z")
Also, everyone, it’s apparent that for all these conceivable hacks to take place, one needs unfettered access to the tabulating computer. I don’t think it’s wise to assume easily-defeatable security. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/109 "2004-11-12T20:23:26Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Can you fix the election by hacking into just one of these PC’s, or would you have to hack into every PC at every precinct that has one? You can’t fix an election by fudging one precinct’s numbers. As I understand it, each county had a single PC receiving data from all the precincts. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/110 "2004-11-12T20:36:47Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > > [@Cheesesteak](#): > > > > Can you fix the election by hacking into just one of these PC’s, or would you have to hack into every PC at every precinct that has one? You can’t fix an election by fudging one precinct’s numbers. > > As I understand it, each county had a single PC receiving data from all the precincts. **Cheesesteak** … were you thinking within one given county in one state? Or were you thinking nationwide? ---
**Author:** ![NurseCarmen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5daacb/32.png) [@NurseCarmen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NurseCarmen)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/111 "2004-11-12T20:55:56Z")
I was a computer field tech in 2000, and did some work for Hennepin County here in Minnesota. The work I was doing was on the printer side, but I can confirm that they had a set up where all the precincts would report back to a central location. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/112 "2004-11-12T20:59:52Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > As I understand it, each county had a single PC receiving data from all the precincts. Any idea what kind of network we are talking about here? Was it private point to point, public VPN…what? We’d need to know if the implication is that the data was somehow ‘hacked’ on route, or if the machines were ‘hacked’ from the outside. > [@bordelond](#): > > Also, everyone, it’s apparent that for all these conceivable hacks to take place, one needs unfettered access to the tabulating computer. I don’t think it’s wise to assume easily-defeatable security. Exactly. I’m highly doubtful that physical security was completely ignored and the machines were open to anyone wandering up to ‘hack’ the machines. I’m also doubtful that no security was put in place ON the machines (i.e. authentication, encryption, etc). I’m not saying its impossible, but this would be a pretty vast conspiricy and a pretty complicated process to change the vote by the margins we are talking in, say, Florida. If you only did it in a few place you’d have to so load the vote one way that it would stand out and be pretty obvious. > [@bordelond](#): > > Getting rid of the GEMS log file wouldn’t affect Windows’ “Date Modified” timestamp, in any case. Yes…assuming anyone actually recorded the date/timestamp for the database file of course, referenced to when the database was SUPPOSED to be modified. Also, assuming the person isn’t a super hacker who has a utility to change the date/timestamp in windows. All things that COULD be done I suppose…but I still haven’t seen any evidence they were. -XT ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2004, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/113 "2004-11-12T23:11:47Z")
BTW, I found [this](http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0411/S00140.htm) cite that discusses the election, exit polls and the electronic machines. > [@](#): > > VOTING MACHINES AND THE UNDERESTIMATE > OF THE BUSH VOTE > CALTECH/MIT > VOTING TECHNOLOGY PROJECT > NOVEMBER 9, 2004 > > Summary > > 1. A series of claims have been made in recent days alleging that discrepancies between exit poll results and the presidential vote in certain states provides evidence of malfeasance in those states. These claims seem to be concentrated on states using electronic voting systems. > > 2. Exit polls predicted a significantly greater vote for Kerry nationwide than the official returns confirmed, but there is not any apparent systematic bias when we take this same analysis to the state level. > > 3. Analysis of deviations between the exit polls and the official returns show no particular patterns for states using electronic voting; nor does this analysis reveal any patterns for states using other forms of voting systems. > > 4. We conclude that there is no evidence, based on exit polls, that electronic voting machines were used to steal the 2004 election for President Bush. > [@](#): > > Conclusion > > There is no evidence that electronic voting machines were used to steal the 2004 election for George Bush. The “facts” that are being circulated on the Internet appear to be selectively chosen to make the point. Much of that analysis appears to rest on early exit poll results, which were bound to be highly volatile, given the nature of exit poll methodology. > > This episode of trying to rely on the exit polls to verify the truthfulness of voting machines illustrates the weakness of this approach — an approach that had gained currency among electronic voting opponents before the November election. Even when they work well, exit polls are too imprecise to lay against the official count, unless every voter is included in the exit poll. The following exchange between a questioner in an on-line chat and Steve Coll, Managing Editor of the Washington Post, sums up the problem nicely: Read through it if you are interested…I’d say (to my mind at least) that this issue is put to rest at least as far as ‘stole’ elections goes. I’m sure MANY on this board will disagree but I’ve yet to see anything even close to convincing that there was wide spread election fraud…or that exit polls are some kind of magical indicators that should be trusted over actual voting numbers if there is a discrepancy. Enjoy. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/114 "2004-11-13T00:56:38Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > **Cheesesteak** … were you thinking within one given county in one state? Or were you thinking nationwide? I was thinking, if you want to change the vote of a state, you’ll need to affect the votes in many districts to avoid being detected. If changing the vote has to be done district by district, that’s a HUGE job. Consolidated to a county makes it easier, but I’d imagine security would be tighter around a centralized point. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/115 "2004-11-14T01:04:07Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I was thinking, if you want to change the vote of a state, you’ll need to affect the votes in many districts to avoid being detected. If changing the vote has to be done district by district, that’s a HUGE job. Consolidated to a county makes it easier, but I’d imagine security would be tighter around a centralized point. The Freeman piece has demonstrated an anomoly. **Cheesesteak** correctly notes that the Fraud hypothesis must pass the plausibility test (among others, I might add). I think it does. I am imagining that a mole programmer at Diebold slips in some errant code, allowing small changes in key states. This wouldn’t require a massive conspiracy. Similarly, the central tabulating software could conceivably be hacked by a single small group of people. Look, I’m not saying anything like this happened. I’m saying that the exit polling firms should release their data so that we could rule out certain hypotheses. Over the medium run, of course, we should install proper procedures; IMHO, [they currently do not exist](http://avirubin.com/judge2.html) > [@](#): > > **From the Link above, Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University writes** : > > The biggest threat posed by the current crop of electronic voting machines is a software problem, either malicious or due to an unintentional bug, that affects the outcome of the election in an _undetectable_ way. The media, however, focus on detectable problems… > > The Diebold Accuvote TS machines were shown to be highly vulnerable to tampering. With physical access to the machines, for example, one could change a few bytes in the ballot definition file and votes for the two major Presidential candidates would be swapped. In that case, none of the procedures we had in place could detect that votes were tallied for the wrong candidates. … > > I stared at the five machines. Inside them were the little memory cards, not unlike the one in my digital camera at home, with 725 votes stored on them. One by one, we removed the memory cards from the machines. I held them in my hand as chief judge Marie was ready to load them into one of the machines that we designated as the accumulator. How fragile. All of the votes from the entire precinct in my hand. Substituting those cards with five identical looking cards, one could replace all of the ballots that were cast with bogus ones. Surely nobody in Maryland would try something like that. **Cheesesteak** ’s point about the difficulties of coordinating a large conspiracy should be kept in mind when reading the last 2 paragraphs above. Nonetheless, the absense of rather basic security measures is disturbing and indicates systematic vulnerabilities to this observer. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/116 "2004-11-14T02:04:06Z")
Update: From [blackboxvoting.org](http://www.blackboxvoting.org/) > [@](#): > > BREAKING – SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting has launched a fraud audit into Florida. Three investigators (Bev Harris, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne) are in Florida right now. We will initiate hand counts on selected counties that have not fully complied with our Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request by Monday (Diebold counties) or Tuesday (other counties). > … > We have reports that both David Cobb (Green Party) and Michael Badnarik (Libertarian Party) will be filing for official recounts in Ohio. Black Box Voting is also launching a fraud audit in Ohio. > … > Black Box Voting is implementing fraud diagnostics on the state of New Mexico. Information we recently received is indicative of widespread vote manipulation. We are not going to publicize the specifics here. > … > Black Box Voting is requesting legal assistance for a specific county in Georgia. Indications of corrupt voting processes, with possible criminal actions by local officials. > … > Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on Pima County Arizona. > … > Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on the state of Nevada. Pro bono legal help certified to practice in Nevada, needed immediately. Multiple irregularities. Need people to take affidavits from election workers, statewide. > … > Ralph Nader to audit Diebold machines in New Hampshire. According to Nader, the current situation with voting machines warrants investigation. Several elements make voting machines “probative” for investigation, according to Nader, a consumer affairs lawyer: proprietary ownership, secret code, vested interests, a high-value reward, and lack of any real consequences, or likelihood of getting caught, for vote manipulation. “We are told that shenanigans are just politics,” said Nader at a press conference on Nov. 10. “Well, it’s not politics. It’s taking away people’s votes.” ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/117 "2004-11-14T16:13:19Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Freenman’s analysis looks interesting, of course he also completely ignores the non-battleground states. I’d like to see if similar discrepencies pop up in those as well. > > You think it’s worth investigating? Lovely. Just remember what is being suggested. Ten different states, each with widely disparate voting and tallying techniques, even within state, were subject to an organized conspiracy to change the vote tally. A conspiracy so tight that the ONLY evidence that anything was amiss is from exit polling that doesn’t match up. > > The changes are large enough that you cannot effect them via individual voting districts, thus the changes have to happen at the top, or through a further organized effort to hack into multiple districts. > > All of this without a single person getting caught, telling their spouse or getting drunk and bragging, or just maybe feeling bad about committing massive election fraud. > > The alternative to this massive conspiracy is that the exit polls were incorrect. I don’t think it was one big conspiracy. I think people operated independently in each state where fraud occured. Also, whatever happened in any one state was not necesarily a coordinated effort. For example, in a state where vote suppression and vote fraud both occured, the supression may have been a separate operation from the fraud. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/118 "2004-11-14T16:39:07Z")
> [@Hazel](#): > > I don’t think it was one big conspiracy. I think people operated independently in each state where fraud occured. Also, whatever happened in any one state was not necesarily a coordinated effort. For example, in a state where vote suppression and vote fraud both occured, the supression may have been a separate operation from the fraud. Exactly. Intimidation, sowing of confusion, not providing enough equipment or ballots for polling places meeting certain demographics, and maybe even outright fraud _possibly_ including the manipulation of electronic tabulations. These things wouldn’t have to be the result of an organized top down effort. They could be the result of individuals operating independently doing their best for God and Country (as they see it) or their own financial interests. Small efforts by small groups or individuals whittling away votes here and there and leading to “death by a thousand cuts”. But I will say that it’s not totally inconceivable to me that a small group of individuals could hack into Windows based tabulators via modem in key districts in key states nationwide and in a close race nudge things just enough to put their preferred candidate over the top. Of course this is a pretty strong accusation and proof would be required. Bev Harris and the other folks at [blackboxvoting.org](http://blackboxvoting.org) are looking to see if there’s any proof of either local or nationwide manipulation. Hopefully nothing of the sort occurred but if it did we should know about it and it should be corrected. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/119 "2004-11-14T16:56:55Z")
So, any proof yet? ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182/120 "2004-11-14T17:22:36Z")
> [@Paul in Saudi](#): > > So, any proof yet? Well, the long lines because of insufficient equipment, the challenges of large numbers of voters, the attempts to sow confusion about dates and locations; all of these seem to be aimed at minority precincts. This can easily be interpreted as an attempt to suppress the Democratic vote. Bev Harris seems to feel that she has evidence of more direct types of attacks, whether she’s right or not still remains to be seen. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-blackboxvoting-org-have-hard-evidence-fraud-took-place-in-tuesdays-election/273182.md?page=7)