The image “http://www.votetrustusa.org/images/votetrust-small2.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

 

The nation's clearinghouse for election audit information!
State and Local Election Integrity Organizations
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Montana
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
Wisconsin
VoteTrustUSA does not speak on behalf of any of the listed organizations.
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>

   
Around the States

Maryland Attorney General Gansler Announces $8.5 Million Claim Against Voting System Manufacturer PDF Print Email
By Maryland Attorney General   
December 24, 2008
State Seeks to Recover Costs Incurred to Provide Voters an Accurate, Reliable, and Secure System

Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler today announced that the State of Maryland has presented Premier Election Solutions (formerly known as Global Election Systems, Inc. and Diebold Elections Systems, Inc.) with a claim to recover costs the State incurred to correct flaws in the touch screen voting system supplied by the company.
 
In December 2001, the State contracted with Diebold Election Systems, Inc. (Diebold) to provide a touch screen voting system including hardware, software, documentation and support services. The State’s payments to Diebold under the voting system contract have totaled approximately $90 million. After the State’s initial acceptance of the new system, expert, independent investigations revealed concealed security vulnerabilities in the voting system. In response to those investigations, beginning in Fiscal Year 2004, the State and Diebold implemented measures to cure the deficiencies that were identified.
 
“The citizens of Maryland must have a voting system they can trust, and Diebold promised to provide such a system,” said Attorney General Gansler. “Yet the equipment supplied by Diebold had vulnerabilities that needed to be fixed before it could be used in State elections. Under the terms of the contract, the company must reimburse the State for its costs of fixing Diebold’s voting system to make it more accurate, reliable, and secure.”

Diebold recently presented the State with nearly $4 million in bills arising from services it provided for the 2008 elections under the voting system contract. As allowed by the contract and State law, the State is withholding payment on those and future bills from Diebold until the dispute is settled.
 
The deficiencies in the Diebold system, as originally supplied by the company, included but were not limited to:
The voting system was not compliant with the State’s information Security Policy and Standards;
There was a need for the State to put into place an integrated process to ensure the integrity of the system;
The system did not provide for election vote totals to be transmitted with cryptographic protocols with 100% verification of the transmitted results;
The system required a risk assessment of its operation and every significant modification of the system requires a new risk assessment to be performed;
The system lacked adequate access controls;
The system lacked provisions to assure that only certified software was loaded; and,
The system’s audit logs were not properly configured.
To implement corrective measures, the State incurred costs for consulting and technical services, personnel and logistics, and materials and supplies. The State estimates the total cost of these expenditures, to date, at $8.47 million.
Comment on This Article
You must login to leave comments...


Other Visitors Comments
There are no comments currently....
Next >
State Resources
Election Law @ Moritz
Electionline
National Conference of State Legislatures
Verified Voting
Model Legislation
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>
State Pages
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Guam
Puerto Rico
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>