Re: Maricopa/Sequoia report - new info, including an obvious certification failure.

From: <dr-jekyll_at_att_dot_net>
Date: Thu Mar 20 2008 - 00:47:55 CDT

I think the first page of the document needs a header showing who did the report, their addresses, why they affiliated to do it, etc.

--
Kurt 
Nor yet, O Freedom! close thy lids 
in slumber for thine enemy never 
sleeps. -- The Antiquity of 
Freedom By William Cullen Bryant
-------------- Original message from "Jim March" <1.jim.march@gmail.com>: -------------- 
We've released the Maricopa report:
http://www.bbvdocs.org/sequoia/Maricopa-County-Elections-Report.pdf
Appendix A focuses in HARD on Sequoia themselves, including what appear to be dead-obvious violations of the certification rules drawing from data not even the California top-to-bottom review people had.
Upshot: Sequoia's central tabulator appears to be at least as vulnerable to tampering than Diebold's GEMS if not moreso.
The rest of the report covers the blunders and security flaws of the Maricopa County elections office and their alarming "outsource everything" policies.
Jim March

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Mon Mar 31 23:17:03 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 31 2008 - 23:17:03 CDT