(no subject)
19 July 2004 14:20![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kmusserRegarding Diebold's AccuVote voting machines:
Today's Washington Post quotes Maryland Gov. Ehrlich's spokeperson as saying "that a report commissioned by the state and released in January concluded that the machines are reliable."
And goes on to say "That study, produced for the state by San Diego-based SAIC Corp., contrasts with a conflicting report issued by Johns Hopkins University professor Avi Rubin, which concluded that the code in the machines could be hijacked by someone seeking to change the election outcome."
What the SAIC study actually says: "This Risk Assessment has identified several high-risk vulnerabilities in the implementation of the managerial, operational, and technical controls for AccuVote-TS voting system." Doesn't sound all that conflicting to me.
Today's Washington Post quotes Maryland Gov. Ehrlich's spokeperson as saying "that a report commissioned by the state and released in January concluded that the machines are reliable."
And goes on to say "That study, produced for the state by San Diego-based SAIC Corp., contrasts with a conflicting report issued by Johns Hopkins University professor Avi Rubin, which concluded that the code in the machines could be hijacked by someone seeking to change the election outcome."
What the SAIC study actually says: "This Risk Assessment has identified several high-risk vulnerabilities in the implementation of the managerial, operational, and technical controls for AccuVote-TS voting system." Doesn't sound all that conflicting to me.