Comelec chief shows computer-illiteracy

Like Mayweather vs Pacquiao, set the grudge match between Comelec head Sixto Brillantes and ex-commissioner Gus Lagman.

Lawyer Sixto made the challenge as self-styled spokesman of Venezuelan Smartmatic. Wrote he to info-technologist Gus (edited):

“In an interview Jan. 6, you declared that results of Smartmatic’s precinct count optical scanners easily can be tampered. This statement undermines the electoral system, since PCOS machines were used in the last two elections. I wonder why you did not say it before or during your Comelec stint. Never did you inform us of such alleged vulnerability.

“As former commissioner it is your duty to demonstrate how the results can easily be tampered. I invite you to exhibit or explain how it can be done. Come to my office to talk details, like presence of media and election stakeholders, and materials to be used.”

To which Gus responded (also excerpted):

“You ask why I ‘did not’ declare before that the PCOS can easily be tampered, or tell the Comelec of ‘such vulnerability.’

“Let me first state: the onus of proving the system safe from manipulation is on Smartmatic and Comelec, since both removed all the safeguards. Still, I accept your invitation.

“Since 2008 I conducted close to 200 presentations on alternatives to automate elections, including defects of the Comelec-chosen PCOS, and Smartmatic violations of law. There were slides on the vulnerability of Smartmatic’s system to internal tampering. Of note is the presentation at San Beda College because I was still with Comelec then. I also presented to the Comelec staff. Although you will likely deny it, I also said this in our en banc and casual meetings.

“Comelec ignores I-T practitioners, and listens only to Smartmatic, a vendor from a country with less I-T expertise than the Philippines. Had the en banc heeded my recommendation in early 2012 not to buy the 80,000 PCOS machines, taxpayers would not be saddled now with multibillion-peso warehousing and refurbishing.

“In my presentations and TV/radio interviews I was asked about vulnerability of Smartmatic system. My answer always was that it is difficult to hack them from outside because PCOS units are hooked up to communication lines only for a few minutes, but easy for an insider to tamper with the codes.

“Tell me when you want the demo, before you retire on Feb. 2. Invite whomever you like. As for the equipment, I will need a PCOS unit, a laptop, a printer, and a CF card reader. It is important that at least one Smartmatic technical person (an ‘insider’ computer programmer) be present. He should know the software and how to modify it. I will ask him to explain the different modules that comprise the software, as well as the data format and contents of the CF cards; after which, I will instruct him where and what to alter.

“Let’s also look into the Consolidation and Canvassing System and the Election Management System that were used in 2013. So we also need a Smartmatic technician who knows how to modify the CCS and EMS.”

*      *      *

People thought the fight was on. But then, pug Sixto dithered, though he tried not to show it in a second letter to Gus:

“It is unreasonable, if not ridiculous, to require in conducting the demo a technician from PCOS maker Smartmatic. You were quick to say how easy tampering of the machines results can be made, but at the same time give unreasonable demands to demonstrate it. This indicates that, contrary to your statement, tampering of the Smartmatic PCOS is not so easy. Thus I remind you to be careful in giving public statements to avoid misinformation.

“While we await the response of Smartmatic on whether they are amenable to your demands, I suggest you conduct the demo with your own programmer.”

Gus persisted:

“I’ve always said that external hacking of the system worries me not; ‘internal tampering’ does. It’s vulnerable to tampering by an ‘insider.’

“How does one demonstrate ‘internal tampering’ but by an ‘insider’ doing it?

“In truth, demonstrating it is unnecessary, as systems practitioners know, but you may not be aware so I accepted your challenge. Systems are designed and developed by people; therefore they can be modified, altered, tampered with by the same people, or by others trained by them. No demo needed; it’s commonsense.

“Example: one week before the 2010 election, Smartmatic recalled the CF cards of all PCOS machines already deployed – to match their formats with the ballots. They altered the contents of the CF cards, a vital component of the system.

“How many thousands of technicians did Smartmatic employ and train to make the alterations? The techs all now know how to modify the contents of the CF cards. Did some of them work with election operators in the 2013 election to offer candidates a sure win for the right amount? “Whether the technicians did it or not, Smartmatic itself proved me right. Contents of CF cards were altered. It was easily done – by insiders.

“Not only the PCOS software and CF cards can be tampered by an insider, but also the Consolidation and Canvassing System and the Election Management System. They shouldn’t be, if Smartmatic made tight controls, which it didn’t.

“All Election Returns and canvassing results should have been posted on a public website. Anybody, even an OFW in the Middle East, could have done his own consolidation of the ER data, and compared his totals with the Comelec official canvass. But the public website had incomplete data. I hope it was not intentional, to prevent public checking of the results. In 2010 and 2013 the entire Smartmatic system was non-transparent – from precinct counting to the canvassing. We had to depend solely on the vendor’s (and Comelec’s) word.

“If you want this internal tampering demonstrated, then do ask Smartmatic to meet my requirements, then set the date.

“I don’t need reminding to be careful with public statements, for I always am. It’s you who needs it. You have called us ‘election saboteurs,’ ‘troublemakers,’ ‘attention seekers.’ Name-calling is for those who have run out of arguments. It’s not only careless, it’s irresponsible.”

*      *      *

Stop dilly-dallying, Sixto, and fight.

*      *      *

By the way, Sixto need not look far for proof of PCOS faults. He just needs to ask his beloved Smartmatic.

Smartmatic’s specializes in direct reading electronic (DRE) voting gadgets, or touch-screen. In fact it supplied those to Comelec in the 2008 ARMM election.

Smartmatic’s product brochures and website at the time denigrated the optical mark reader (OMR), or the PCOS. It said the OMR would only spark “civil unrest” because of the “2-10 percent error rate.”

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m. DWIZ, (882-AM).

Gotcha archives on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jarius-Bondoc/1376602159218459, or The STAR website http://www.philstar.com/author/Jarius%20Bondoc/GOTCHA

E-mail: [email protected]