Here's an insider's more accurate description of the OES, the concept was started way way back so the proponents will have all the time in this world to make it work. The initial working prototype was based on PHP but due to lack of funds it prevented the developers from pursuing it (they have to make a living too, families to feed), then after that they have to look for others to do the work and this is where UP came in, they wrote a new proof of concept and this time it is based on Java then the rest is history.
As regards to the law suit, I hate to be cynical but we all know what's going to happen, though I'm still hoping the Almighty will open the eyes of the Justices to render a decision that will benefit the citizenry. On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Tito Mari Francis Escaño < [email protected]> wrote: > I have read about OES and also its successful use in a campus-based > election (simulation?) in UP. I was supposed to say "why wasn't it > implemented or approved for use in the upcoming National Elections" but my > conspiracy theory savvy spilt personality replied immediately: "It's all > about kickbacks and political corruption!" which I would have wanted to be > viewed as a challenge :) > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 8:02 PM, jan gestre <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Where have you been? :D There's an alternative called the Open Elections >> System spearheaded by the group of Gus Lagman (Namfrel), as it's last stand >> it was endorsed by former Comelec Commissioner Christian Monsod as a viable >> alternative unfortunately it didn't matter because current COMELEC peeps was >> hell bent on automating the election. Some people here in the list were >> involved in the project in one or way another. >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Tito Mari Francis Escaño < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Is it possible to design, implement and propose a free open source >>> alternative to the Automated Election System (AES) given the timeframe that >>> we seem to be running out of as we speak? Is it possible to have access to >>> the specification and interfaces of the AES in question? >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Michael Mondragon < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree with Peter. What I am trying to suggest in discussions is to >>>> probably ignore whoever wants to embarass us with this kind of mumblings. >>>> We are here to help our country and our kids' future. Since clock is >>>> ticking and we don't have concrete plans what we'll do whether we win with >>>> our petition or lose, what we need to do is what matters most. Again, its >>>> better to do the right thing (and tried) than doing nothing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Peter Santiago <[email protected]> >>>> To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> Sent: Wed, October 14, 2009 2:52:26 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [plug] COMELEC SUED (Was: The Death of Election >>>> 2010SourceCodeReview) >>>> >>>> Pablo Manalastas wrote: >>>> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>> If that is the case will the >>>> >>> >>>> >> COMELEC/Smartmatic/Whoever come up with a >>>> >> >>>> >>> proposed blackbox test that would capture all the >>>> >>> >>>> >> scenarios (including >>>> >> >>>> >>> the ones of my fellow PLUG members)? >>>> >>> >>>> >> I have not thought of this. But I assume Comelec, etc., >>>> >> will not refuse such a >>>> >> reasonable suggestion. >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > As a CenPEG fellow, I was an official observer at the SBAC testing of >>>> the Smartmatic computers in May 2009. I also had a chance to talk to Rene >>>> Sarmiento, Atty Tolentino, Chairman Melo, Atty Ferdinand Rafanan.. We also >>>> talked to CAC members Renato Garcia and CAC Chairman Roxas-Chua. Our >>>> conversations were either face-to-face visits, or on national television >>>> (some of you might have seen the ANC TV shows where Atty Rafanan and myself >>>> had a heated discussions). We have made many resonable suggestions to >>>> Comelec, including enabling the voter verification of the PCOS >>>> interpretation of his ballot markings, suggestions for testing, suggestions >>>> for generating the private-public key pairs for the persons of the BEI, not >>>> for the positions of the BEI, etc. Comelec refuses to listen to reasonable >>>> suggestions if these suggestions do not come from either Smartmatic or the >>>> CAC. I have lost faith in COMELEC's ability to accept ideas from the >>>> academic community, the >>>> > NGOs, the computer societies (PLUG, PCS, CPU, etc). COMELEC wants us >>>> to have faith in their computerized system, but it does not listen to >>>> reason. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>> Also can COMELEC/Smartmatic/Whoever come up with a >>>> >>> >>>> >> solution to the >>>> >> >>>> >>> access to source code provision in the enabling law? >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> I think that you have to take this up with Comelec and the >>>> >> responsible parties. >>>> >> In my personal opinion, I don't think you will be granted >>>> >> to see the proprietory >>>> >> source codes used in AES. >>>> >> I am not in anyway connected with Comelec nor Smartmatic >>>> >> nor shall I profit >>>> >> directly or indirectly from the project at all. >>>> >> I am voicing my opinions on behalf of me as a Filipino >>>> >> Citizen and as >>>> >> a registered >>>> >> voter during this coming election. >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > COMELEC will not allow anyone to review the source code of the >>>> election computer programs. That is why we went to the Supreme Court. If >>>> you read CenPEG's petition, you will see that we have exhausted all legal >>>> means to convince COMELEC to follow the law (RA-9369 section 12) and >>>> release >>>> the source code as required by law, but COMELEC does not want to listen to >>>> our reasonable request. >>>> > >>>> > I think this is quite understandable, since COMELEC is trying to >>>> protect itself and Smartmatic from copyright infringements of the Dominion >>>> Voting System's proprietary election programs. Smartrmatic is only a >>>> licensee of Dominion, and COMELEC is a sublicensee of Smartmatic. >>>> SMartmatic only has a binary-level license from Dominion, and only Dominion >>>> has the right to modify the PCOS program in any way. COMELEC failed to >>>> enforce one of the vital provisions in its contract with Smartmatic -- the >>>> requirement to Smartmatic to put the source code of the PCOS and CCS >>>> programs in escrow at the Central Bank, so that COMELEC can comply with the >>>> provision of Section 12 on source code review by interested political >>>> parties and groups. This means that COMELEC approved Smartmatic's bid, even >>>> if Smartmatic did not comply with a number of provisions in the COMELEC >>>> terms of reference to bidders, and in this sense, COMELEC disobeyed the >>>> law. >>>> When a bidder joins the >>>> > bidding, it agrees to follow the terms of reference, including >>>> providing the source code, even if the software is closed-source commercial >>>> softrware. In a way, Smartmatic was engaged in deception, since all the >>>> COMELEC commissioners are lawyers who can not understand the licensing >>>> agreement between Dominion and Smartmatic, the agreement that was presented >>>> to COMELEC as part of Smnartmatic's bid documentation. COMELEC was already >>>> way in too deep into its commitment to Smartmatic, when its discovered this >>>> failure on the part of Smartmatic. >>>> > >>>> > ~Pablo Manalastas~ >>>> > >>>> > >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>> Whew! this is one extremely long thread. Well, both of the ayes and >>>> nays have their own point, but in the context of the law, there is no >>>> loophole. Binary testing is not equal to source code review, Automated >>>> testing is not equal to realtime testing, compounded with insufficient QA, >>>> this is one hell of a deadman switch. Mission critical applications are >>>> rigorously scrutinized and source code examined. The AES is a mission >>>> critical application since it determines the fate of a country, not a >>>> simple >>>> matter of just Counting and Tallying, especially in the light of >>>> overwhelming computer threats. Therefore transparency/source code review >>>> is >>>> important to ensure that no hidden easter eggs or nests are present to >>>> screw >>>> up the whole situation. In any case, while the case is still pending with >>>> the Supreme Court, why don't we start thinking of ways to ensure the >>>> safety >>>> and integrity of the system? The wheels of justice turns ever so slowly >>>> here >>>> in our country, that I would say, it would be a miracle if the Supreme >>>> Court can put out a decision regarding the interpretation of the law within >>>> this year. >>>> >>>> -- Peter Santiago [email protected] >>>> My website: www.psinergybbs.com >>>> My spamtrap address: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>> >>> >>> >>> _________________________________________________ >>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://jangestre.blogpsot.com >> >> _________________________________________________ >> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >> > > > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph > -- http://jangestre.blogpsot.com
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
