Cases thrown out of court because manufacturer won't disclose source code.

[Amaryllis]

FLORIDA JUDGES THROW OUT DUI CASES FOR LACK OF SOURCE CODE FOR BREATH TESTERS
http://tampatrib.com/floridametronews/MGBUBJ5QK9E.html

computerized voting, we'd have to rerun two presidential elections.
Anyone for a class action suit?]

TAMPA TRIBUNE - Hundreds of cases involving breath-alcohol tests have
been thrown out by Seminole County judges in the past five months
because the test's manufacturer will not disclose how the machines work.
All four of Seminole County's criminal judges have been using a standard that if a DUI defendant asks for a key piece of information about how the machine works - its software source code, for instance - and the state cannot provide it, the breath test is rejected, the Orlando Sentinel reported Wednesday.

Prosecutors have said they do not know how many drunken drivers have
been acquitted as a result. But Gino Feliciani, the misdemeanor division chief in the Seminole County State Attorney's Office, said the conviction rate has dropped to 50 percent or less.

[dogday]

1. Don't you think someone in the Sheriff's Dept would of asked that

question? I mean "how does it work?" is the number one question you ask... nuts, absolutely nuts....

[Ready4Change]

2. Florida voters, take note:

If a DUI can be tossed due to a lack of source code, why not an election?

[John Q. Citizen]

3. This could be interesting, especially on a local level.

I have a question about touch screen voting. How come a voter can't sit inside the booth and vote multiple times on the black box?

And how would anyone know?

[Bill Bored]

11. Smart cards and other methods are used to prevent this.

But they can be tampered with to allow just what you say.

There are far more efficient methods to rig the stuff though.

[satya]

4. Opens up an interesting avenue, doesn't it? Thanks for the post. n/t

[benburch]

5. Well, as the People really do not elect the President...

We probably cannot challenge the result!

The President is elected by the electoral college. They may have been fraud in the election of electors, but given that fraud is one step removed from the actual election of the President, and given that the spineless democrats in Congress would not prevent the certification either time, we cannot do a damned thing about it.

Impeachment? Sure! But only once we have replaced all the DINOs with real Democrats, with spines, and voted in enough fresh blood to get control of the house and senate... And we have to use those same damned voting machines to do it, too.

[Bill Bored]

10. And this is a perfect justification to pad the popular vote for Shrub

once it was evident that he "won" the electoral college.

Since the people have no right to vote for President anyway, what do a few million extra votes mean legally, as long as they don't decide the outcome? Maybe not a damn thing, especially in the minds of the neocons.

Now when you mess with Electoral Votes, THEN you're screwing with the Constitution and THAT'S serious! But if one was convinced that Bush won FL and OH, what's a few million more votes in the Red and Blue states? Little more than a fraternity prank right?

[Wilms]

6. Land Shark. You there?

[Amaryllis]

8. I sent it to Land Shark! My first thought...

[Unforgiven]

7. This

is interesting, and Kick!!!!

[Bill Bored]

9. Here's what NY was planning:

There was bi-partisan agreement that the source code was to be held in escrow and only revealed in the event of a contest of election. I would HOPE that it wouldn't take more than a NY minute to mount such a contest of course, the day after the first DRE-infested election, even if every race in the state was a landslide! On the other hand, this depends on where the candidates and their lawyers stand on this stuff. If they keep assuming the system is secure, no one will contest anything unless it's decided by only a few votes.

These bills are not law yet, but if there is a law, that's probably what it would say. It's not a bad compromise, provided you can find a judge to go along with the contest of election. I suppose the undisclosed software and the fact that only a small percentage of VVPATs would be audited would be sufficient grounds, but you never know what those "activist" judges will do, right?

The other problem is proving that the escrowed software was actually running on every machine on election day! Good luck with that!

And what if even the disclosed software could set up to switch votes?

[adolfo]

12. Escrowed software can be verified

>The other problem is proving that the escrowed software was actually running on every machine on election day! Good luck with that!


It can be done. The source code can be compiled and compared to the binaries inside the machines. First step is confiscating the machines for forensic analysis.

[Bill Bored]

13. Sure and you could digitally sign all the software too.

But we're talking about legislators, not engineers!
WTF do they know?

[Wilms]

14. kick n/t

[tommcintyre]

15. kick

[Wilms]

16. .