It is impossible for a company to be non-partisan. That is why it would
be nice to develop an open source solution. That would be non-partisan.
Having being created by democrats, republicans, anarchists, whoever
wanted to contribute.

-JP

-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Fitzgerald [mailto:bkfsec (at) sdf.lonestar (dot) org [email concealed]]
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 2:19 PM
To: vvaduva (at) dapsco (dot) com [email concealed]
Cc: bugtraq (at) securityfocus (dot) com [email concealed]; Polazzo Justin; pressinfo (at) diebold (dot) com [email concealed]
Subject: Re: Diebold Global Election Management System (GEMS) Backdoor
Account Allows Authenticated Users to Modify Votes

vvaduva (at) dapsco (dot) com [email concealed] wrote:

>
>
>Well now you are getting assinine and political! If that's the case,
>why would I trust my democrat baker with making non-poisoned bread for
>me? The problem is technical not political! e-voting is
>CRAP...insecure, inaccurate. Stick with what works, i.e. paper
>ballots. They are cheap, accountable and hard to fake.
>
>
>
The problem is both technical and political. The political impacts the
technical -- the technical aspect doesn't exist in a bubble.

Likewise, I wouldn't trust a voting machine that was created by a
company whose executives promised elections to democrats.

I wasn't making a point about the party, I was making a point about the
appearance of partisanship. Voting machine companies should be
inherently non-partisan.

-Barry

[ reply ]