] Recent election problems have sparked great interest in
] managing the election process through the use of
] electronic voting systems. While computer scientists, for
] the most part, have been warning of the perils of such
] action, vendors have forged ahead with their products,
] claiming increased security and reliability. Many
] municipalities have adopted electronic systems, and the
] number of deployed systems is rising. For these new
] computerized voting systems, neither source code nor the
] results of any third-party certification analyses have
] been available for the general population to study,
] because vendors claim that secrecy is a necessary
] requirement to keep their systems secure. Recently,
] however, the source code purporting to be the software
] for a voting system from a major manufacturer appeared on
] the Internet. This manufacturer's systems were used in
] Georgia's state-wide elections in 2002, and the company
] just announced that the state of Maryland awarded them an
] order valued at up to $55.6 million to deliver touch
] screen voting systems.

The press claims this paper is discredited because Avi Rubin was involved with an electronic voting company. Read it for yourself and see what you think.

Analysis of an Electronic Voting System

] A group of open-source advocates and critics will meet
] behind closed doors Wednesday afternoon, in the first of
] at least two meetings in search of a compromise on what
] could be the first bill in the United States to encourage
] the use of open-source software by a state government.
]
] The bill, introduced by Oregon Rep. Phil Barnhart,
] D-Eugene, last month, would require the state to consider
] using open-source software when buying new programs.
] Although the bill does not specifically mandate
] open-source software over proprietary software, the bill
] does say it cannot be excluded from the selection
] process. The bill, HB 2892, also says open-source options
] can "significantly reduce the state's costs of obtaining
] and maintaining software."

ZDNet: Open-source battle rages in Oregon

The Supreme Court refused Monday to be drawn into a dispute over the boundaries of a law giving the government broader surveillance authority after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations wanted the justices to consider when the government should be allowed to monitor someone's telephone conversations and e-mail, then use the information to prosecute them.

Supreme Court Bugs Out On Bugging