Belgium [was Re: [E-voting] Nedap voting machines successfully hacked]
cansbro at eircom.net
Sat Oct 7 00:52:36 IST 2006
I was in Liege last week for a few days. On my last day there I was
given a lift to the train station by a man who, it turns out, is one of
the candidates in the upcoming local elections.
He seemed like someone I might want to vote for, if I had a vote in
Belgium. I brought up the electronic voting issue, curious to see what
his attitude was. He didn't know anything about it and was unconcerned
because they'd been using these computers for about 10 years. Then he
said, half joking but half seriously, that his party was in the
majority in his area, so if the elections were rigged maybe it probably
wouldn't hurt him. He didn't seem the least bit interested in knowing more.
What a disappointing attitude.
David GLAUDE wrote:
>I was suggesting to use Tempest proof equipement as our Belgian voting
>computer use normal "VGA" greyscale screen.
>An unexpected but welcome side effect of our Dutch friends is that the
>Dutch speaking side of Belgium start to think (or at least talk) about
>We had 5 minutes on radio, 30 second on TV.
>Of course there was a timing issue and the Dutch friend could not have
>choosen a better moment, we have election this Sunday. ;-)
>The only problem for us is that journalist do not care about what should
>be done (VVAT or else) and what is the real problem. Some of them even
>asked if *we* could hack the Belgian Voting Machine.
>We said it is even easyer than NEDAP:
>* We have the source code
>* Those are standard PCs from 10 years ago
>* We just need a floppy with a modified software
>It is easy to say, but not exactly easy to do. Even if we have a way to
>make self modifying (to remove any trace) floppy with corrupted
>software, we still have to swap the original floppy with our version.
>Of course this is not true for an insider...
>Maybe for the Belgian system, a bios attack (PC bios, card writer
>firware, ...) might work better.
>Why do they believe we are hacker?
>We just repeated for the last 10 years that this way of voting is not
>PS: The Belgian TV program was aired with some nice effect on the french
>speaking belgian. It was mostly cosmic ray issue plus some news from USA
>and from you. As soon as I have a digital copy, I will share with
>Margaret and the happy few for pure educational use (damn copyright).
>Dr J Pelan wrote:
>>On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Adrian Colley wrote:
>>>I'm especially impressed by our Dutch friends' work on compromising
>>>emanations. "Through the audio path of a scanner, we can make out clear
>>>differences for different candidates. [...] However: we can easily
>>>profile all the bursts for the various candidates and simply match the
>>>received signal to all known candidates."
>>There is some irony given that it was a Dutchman that published the first
>>papers on the practical aspects of eavesdropping on incidental EM
>>emanations - namely Wim van Eck.
>>I seem to recall at least one person on this list suggested van Eck
>>radiation testing. Googling through the archives we find that it was a
>>certain Mr Adrian Colley, no less! So well done ;-)
>E-voting mailing list
>E-voting at lists.stdlib.net
More information about the E-voting