California Restricts Voting Machines

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Voting-Machines.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

August 4, 2007
California Restricts Voting Machines
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California's secretary of state placed rigorous security conditions on voting equipment used in dozens of counties and limited the use of two of the most widely used machines statewide.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced the measures minutes before midnight Friday night -- making good on a promise to tell counties if their voting equipment would be decertified at least six months before California's Feb. 5 presidential primary.

The announcement leaves the most affected counties with little time to find alternate equipment in time for the primary. The decision follows an eight-week security review of voting systems used in all but a few of California's 58 counties.

University of California computer experts found that voting machines sold by three companies -- Diebold Election Systems, Hart InterCivic and Sequoia Voting Systems -- were vulnerable to hackers and that voting results could be altered.

Bowen said she had decertified the machines for use and then recertified them on the condition they meet her new security standards. When asked what would happen if the companies failed to do so, Bowen responded, ''I think they will.''

She also limited the Diebold and Sequoia machines to one per polling place. That will force some counties to find replacement equipment on a tight schedule.

Bowen ordered the review, which was released last week, to ensure that California would not face the same doubts about the accuracy of its voting systems that hit Florida after the 2000 election and Ohio in 2004.

The additional security requirements she imposed included banning all modum or wireless connections to the machines to prevent them from being linked to an outside computer or the Internet. Each machine that must be recertified also has a lengthy list of additional conditions it must meet, many of them highly technical.

She also required a full manual count of all votes cast on Diebold or Sequoia machines to ensure accuracy.

Bowen said the study revealed some vulnerabilities that would allow hackers to manipulate the systems ''with little chance of detection and with dire consequences.'' Her review also found that the machines posed problems for disabled voters.

Steve Weir, president of the state association of registrars, warned that the companies would have to get federal approval if Bowen's conditions for recertification require any more than minimal changes to a machine's software and hardware. That process could take up to eight months -- well past California's presidential primary.

Company officials have downplayed the results of Bowen's review, saying they reflected unrealistic, worst-case scenarios that would be counteracted by security measures taken by the companies and local election officials.

The companies also complained that the examiners had access to computer coding, manuals and other information that is not available to the public.

Officials with Sequoia said they were disappointed with Bowen's withdrawal of the company's certification but would make necessary improvements. They defended their equipment as accurate and secure.

''Electronic voting systems have never been successfully tampered with in an actual election,'' the company said in a statement. ''That same statement cannot be made about lever machines and paper-based voting systems throughout our nation's history.''

Messages left with Diebold and Hart InterCivic early Saturday morning were not immediately returned.

Machines made by a fourth company, Election Systems & Software, were not included in the review because it was late providing information the secretary of state's office needed, said Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Bowen.

The secretary of state launched a separate review of that company's Inkavote Plus system, which is used only in Los Angeles County. On Friday, Bowen said she had decertified that equipment but would review and reconsider it.

A message left for a company spokesman early Saturday morning was not immediately returned.