Re: Potent new evidence completing the Windows CEfraud picture

From: Jim March <jmarch_at_prodigy_dot_net>
Date: Fri Aug 04 2006 - 21:05:27 CDT

OK. Joe Hall pointed out something important, enough so that I'm going
to edit my "walkthrough" tomorrow and credit him in a footnote.

When Wyle declared Accubasic "COTS", it formed a "pattern" very similar
to what's been going on with CE. That pattern should be noted because
if anything, ABasic is an even more obvious "non-COTS" issue than CE!

Just flew back from AZ, kinda wiped right now but tomorrow at the latest
I'll integrate these ideas (and cites from the docs he links to) into
the "walkthrough" memo.

Jim

Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:

>On 8/4/06, Jim March <jmarch@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
>>You know, a lawyer I spoke to last night had an interesting point to make.
>>
>>Despite having the Diebold memo from Talbot Iredale on the one hand and
>>Wyle's testimony on the other that Diebold withheld the code, and no
>>mention of CE in the Wyle cert docs, there still exists a miniscule
>>possibility that Diebold DID turn over everything to Wyle and Wyle just
>>ignored it all.
>>
>>So...on a hyper-technical level we don't have "proof of fraud" on
>>Diebold's part.
>>
>>But really...what are the odds?
>>
>>
>
>Well, I think there's one important piece of this puzzle that is
>missing... specifically, David Wagner pointed out to me in late June
>that there are direct responses from both Ciber and Wyle on the COTS
>issue in this public records request document (see pages 185 and 188
>of this PDF):
>
>http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/calif-records-30580.pdf
>
>I've taken the liberty of extracting those pages and putting them in
>their own PDF here:
>
>http://www.josephhall.org/tmp/Ciber_and_Wyle_on_ABasic.pdf
>
>Ciber's response clearly shows that DESI represented the ABasic files
>as COTS. Wyle's response is a non-response... which is rather strange
>as the various ITA reports that EPIC and BBV have come across clearly
>show that they examined the abinterp.c (and associated header file) as
>far back as 2001 for the TS and as far back as 1996 for optical scan
>(what was then the Global Election Systems AccuVote-ES 2000, right?).
>
>For the 1996 evidence, see page 13 of Wyle Report No. 44908-01,
>available here:
>http://www.epic.org/privacy/voting/oh/wyle_diebold-accues2.pdf (for
>other parts of that report, go here and scroll down to "Wyle
>Laboratory Independent Testing Authority (ITA) Report on Qualification
>Testing of the AccuVote ES-2000 Vote Tally System":
>http://www.epic.org/privacy/voting/foia/default.html ).
>
>However, note that at this time the equipment was subject to the 1990
>standards (which are quite different in the Security section compared
>to the 2002 or 2005 standards).
>
>best, Joe
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Thu Aug 31 23:17:04 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 31 2006 - 23:17:10 CDT