When I read about this yesterday, alarm bells went off. Could this be the Ohio surprise that steals the election for Romney? I can't find a diary here that addresses it.* I can't believe it's not getting a huge amount of attention, since, if I'm reading this correctly, what partisan Ohio SOS John Husted has done with the last minute installation of uncertified and untested software in a number of critical counties could make the effect of his outright attempts at voter suppression pale in comparison:
The Free Press confirms installation, secret justification of uncertified last minute election tabulation reporting software in OhioPlease read the entire article.
November 2, 2012
The Free Press has obtained internal memos from the senior staff of the Ohio Secretary of State's office confirming the installation of untested and uncertified election tabulation software. Yesterday, the Free Press reported that "experimental" software patches were installed on ES&S voting machines in 39 Ohio counties...
According to the contract between the Ohio Secretary of State's office and ES&S, this last minute "experimental" software update will supposedly transmit custom election night reports to the Secretary of State's office from the county boards of elections, bypassing the normal election night reporting methods...
Just as in 2004, the Ohio Secretary of State's office has enabled the possibility of a "man in the middle" attack. This software, functioning on a network through which votes are transmitted could act to intercept, alter or destroy votes from counties where it is not even installed, hence the "man in the middle" nickname...
Government reports such as Ohio's Everest study document that any single change to the system could corrupt the whole voting process.
An unelected, partisan group of attorneys appears to have conspired to install election software without testing and certification that they are professionally unqualified to pass judgment upon. These types of last minute installations of software patches on voting machines are considered suspect by knowledgeable and experienced election protection attorneys, in light of all the voting machine irregularities exposed during the 2004 election in Ohio.
And then please explain why this isn't a major headline event. If the election comes down to Ohio, and if these counties can tip Ohio, and if the "man in the middle" attack scenario actually were being used and could not be adequately proven ...
* UPDATE: From the comments, I was incorrect, there have been 2 diaries:
I also appears that the Free Press article has been discounted if not discredited by a number of people, and that some consider the Free Press to be a CT site. I am actively considering taking this diary down, although it's now received a number of recs, so out of respect to those who rec'd it, I suppose leaving it up for further comments would be acceptable. Would appreciate any comments about whether I should do that.
2nd UPDATE: (2045 MST) -- nobody has requested that the diary be taken down. I am now very reassured that the Free Press article was ill informed and sensationalist, although (charitably) well intended. I think it's useful that this discussion be added to the previous diaries, if only to help alleviate concern on the part of anyone else who stumbles across the FP article(s). I will admit to being more than a little embarrassed to have been taken in.
I will change the title, however. For the sake of completeness, my original title was:
Uncertified election machine software in Ohio: "Man in the Middle Attack"?
The edited title is:
UPDATED: Concern over uncertified election software in Ohio appears unwarranted.
I don't think any additional comments are needed at this point, but feel free to do so if you'd like.