by Ninez Cacho-Olivares Editor-in-chief (The Daily Tribune)
http://www.tribune.net.ph/headlines/20100225hed1.html
The 2010 presidential elections in May will likely be marred by massive electoral cheating, a warning that has been earlier aired by the poll body’s Technical Working Group (TWG), in a report to the Commission on Elections (Comelec) en banc.
The anti-fraud company that is supposed to embed through advanced technological and electronic devices which will consist of the safeguards to prevent the use of fake ballots, the BTI Advantage Inc. (BTIE) which has reportedly been favored by the Comelec was pointed to by the TWG to the poll body as “enjoying the support of the powerful (cheating) syndicate in the Comelec.”
The BTIE, according to the same report which was updated on Feb. 3, 2010, “was able to block the notice of award for mysterious reasons” and because it is only Smartmatic and the National Printing Office (NPO) that have their own “safeguards,” and with Comelec having none at all, “Comelec is totally ‘naked’ now.”
“Any clever operator can make fake ballots. It is obvious now that the real purpose of BTIE is either to overprice or sabotage or both (to plunder at least P200 million in overprice or simply sabotage the elections to let cheaters win),” the report said.
The report of the TWG group, which was obtained by the Tribune yesterday noted in alarm, that “both the NPO and Smartmatic will be providing their own anti-fraud safeguards, independently of each other,” allegedly “to prevent the use of fake ballots.”
But the report also pointed out the fact that the “Comelec itself has none (of its own anti-fraud safeguards),” despite the fact that the second to the last paragraph of Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369 is clear in imposing such obligation upon the Commission itself and not on third parties such as NPO or Smartmatic.
The TWG report stated that the situation can be depicted as a “fragile tripod of anti-fraud technologies, (with) the first two legs (Smartmatic and NPO) redundantly using the same ultraviolet technology, while the most crucial third leg (Comelec) is missing. For, until now, Comelec is still at a loss on what technology to use so as to comply with Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369.”
Comelec, the TWG group warned, may stand accused of “dereliction of duty for abdicating from a transcendentally important function.”
On the safeguards of the Smartmatic- TIM Corp. and the NPO, Smartmatic printing coordinator Ronald Lao said they will be utilizing “hidden images that become visible only under ultraviolet light.”
But the report also stated that the “NPO was silent about (its) security feature, claiming that the obscurity of (its ) technology is itself part of the security strategy.”
This in itself is suspect.
“Intense negotiations between Director Esmeralda Amora Ladra and her counterpart in NPO, Evelyn Perlado, resulted in a price drop from P2.90 to P2.20 per ballot for the security marks. “But there seems to be a corresponding decrease in NPO’s enthusiasm for using top quality anti-fraud technology.
“The latest word from NPO is that it will merely ride on the same ultraviolet technology of Smartmatic,” the TWG report stated.
The report was focused on the mandated duty of the Comelec to “prescribe the use or adoption of the latest technological and electronic devices” pursuant to subsection (i) of Section 52 of the Omnibus Election Code, and to “prevent the use of fake ballots” by ensuring the provision of “safeguards” pursuant to the second to the last paragraph of Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369,” which states: To prevent the use of fake ballots, the Comelec through the (Steering) committee shall ensure that the necessary safeguards, such as, but not limited to, bar codes, holograms, color shifting, ink, microprinting, are provided on the ballot.
It will be recalled that just recently, news broke out that 2 million ballots ordered printed by the Comelec for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao had no security markings from the NPO.
This newsreport was quickly dismissed by the Comelec, whose officials claimed that there were enough security marks, and that the NPO security marks were merely an “additional layer,” since the bar code serves as the NPO’s security mark, plus that the Comelec had its own mark.
Apparently, since the TWG report says Comelec has no anti-fraud safeguard at all for the ballots, and that the NPO is merely riding on Smartmatic’s security marks, only Smartmatic has embedded the security mark in the ballot.
Smartmatic TIM had also earlier decided to use Kodak Versamark VL2000 to print all the ballots. Two proposals boasting of international stature, with claims of compatibility with the reclusive specifications of Kodak Versamark VL2000 remained: BTI eAdvantage Inc. and Nautilus Security Technologies.
“In gist, both proposals involve a combination of micro embedding or implanting secret images into the Portable Document Format (PDF) file that serves as the data which the Kodak Versamark VL2000 shall micro imprint onto each ballot. Our human eyes cannot see these secret images on the ballots unless we use special decoding lens.
“Thus, if a ballot unlawfully disappears and later reappears under questionable circumstances or for whatever reason, anyone may challenge the authenticity of the reappearing ballot. To prove or disprove authenticity, the investigating authority will use the decoding lens to check if the official hidden images are there. If the official hidden images do not appear through the decoding lens, the ballot under question is fake.
The head-on competition between BTI eAdvantage and Nautilus had been lingering for more than a year already, the report said, adding that as early as sometime before Oct. 25, 2008, the Administrative Services Department already made preliminary studies of the features of BTI eAdvantages, the partial result of which now forms part of the discussions in En Banc Resolution No. 08-1115 dated Nov. 11, 2008.
The Oct. 25, 2008 memorandum of ASD Director Julio Thaddeus Herman discusses the anti-counterfeiting solutions of BTI eAdvantage which offer several interlocking technologies, such as the Scrambled Indicia (SI); SI Doc-U-Lok Software; Stealth SI Authentication System; Stealth SI Software Application; SI Digital Authentication and the SI Web Decoder Authentication. This was covered by an en banc resolution.
Nautilus was said to have offered a proprietary software under United States Patent No. 2005141940 -- Authentic8 Hidden Image Security ? which does not require any special ink nor any special printer and yet it can encrypt up to three hidden images into one space. The group takes pride in being the security technology provider of no less than the United States Postal Service. Its other popular clients are Nokia, British American Tobacco, Valentino, Dolce & Gabana, John Galliano, and Bvlgari.
What appeared important is a requirement of the “active participation of the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) in the evaluation of the anti-counterfeiting proposals.”
Another en banc resolution required both BTI eAdvantages Inc. and Nautilus Security Technologies to submit to a study which the BAC would have to conduct in coordination with the Election Support Group.
It was pointed out by the TWG group that BTI eAdvantage has been “taking advantage” by conducting tests on the Kodak Versamark VL2000 printers in NPO without, however, informing the BAC and the Election Support Group when the basic protocol in en banc resolution was for both proponents to officially submit their proposals to the BAC. Thereafter, the BAC should supervise whatever compatibility test is necessary on the Kodak Versamark VL2000 printers.
The TWG also noted BTIE had been transacting directly with the NPO and BTIE was able to conduct test preparations sometime between Nov. 8, 2010 to Jan. 12, 2010, yet BTIE was silent and remains silent about the outcome of the test result.
To settle matters, the BAC and ESG gave both proponents equal opportunities to test run their respective features on the Kodak Versamark printers from Jan. 20 to 25 resulting in a successful demonstration by Nautilus. As to BTIE, it made a request for additional testings.
Meanwhile, another printer was acquired by Smartmatic to hasten the printing of the official ballots.
Gene Gregorio, spokesman for Smartmatic said the additional new printer was rented not because of a failure to meet its April 25 deadline but to ease the load of printing in the four rented machines.
“We are renting a fifth printer only to ease the load of printing and be more prepared but not because we are outside the deadline,” he said.
Smartmatic started printing the ballots last Feb. 8 using the VersaMark Kodak machines from Switzerland. Each printer can accomodate 200,000 ballots a day or a total of 800,000 for the four printers.
With the new printer, ballots being printed in the NPO will increase by 200,000 or a total of 1 million per day.
Gregorio said they have completed printing the ballots for the ARMM, Cagayan Valley and Region 4.
“Printing is in full swing and meeting the deadline,” Gregorio added.
With Marie Surbano
The 2010 presidential elections in May will likely be marred by massive electoral cheating, a warning that has been earlier aired by the poll body’s Technical Working Group (TWG), in a report to the Commission on Elections (Comelec) en banc.
The anti-fraud company that is supposed to embed through advanced technological and electronic devices which will consist of the safeguards to prevent the use of fake ballots, the BTI Advantage Inc. (BTIE) which has reportedly been favored by the Comelec was pointed to by the TWG to the poll body as “enjoying the support of the powerful (cheating) syndicate in the Comelec.”
The BTIE, according to the same report which was updated on Feb. 3, 2010, “was able to block the notice of award for mysterious reasons” and because it is only Smartmatic and the National Printing Office (NPO) that have their own “safeguards,” and with Comelec having none at all, “Comelec is totally ‘naked’ now.”
“Any clever operator can make fake ballots. It is obvious now that the real purpose of BTIE is either to overprice or sabotage or both (to plunder at least P200 million in overprice or simply sabotage the elections to let cheaters win),” the report said.
The report of the TWG group, which was obtained by the Tribune yesterday noted in alarm, that “both the NPO and Smartmatic will be providing their own anti-fraud safeguards, independently of each other,” allegedly “to prevent the use of fake ballots.”
But the report also pointed out the fact that the “Comelec itself has none (of its own anti-fraud safeguards),” despite the fact that the second to the last paragraph of Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369 is clear in imposing such obligation upon the Commission itself and not on third parties such as NPO or Smartmatic.
The TWG report stated that the situation can be depicted as a “fragile tripod of anti-fraud technologies, (with) the first two legs (Smartmatic and NPO) redundantly using the same ultraviolet technology, while the most crucial third leg (Comelec) is missing. For, until now, Comelec is still at a loss on what technology to use so as to comply with Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369.”
Comelec, the TWG group warned, may stand accused of “dereliction of duty for abdicating from a transcendentally important function.”
On the safeguards of the Smartmatic- TIM Corp. and the NPO, Smartmatic printing coordinator Ronald Lao said they will be utilizing “hidden images that become visible only under ultraviolet light.”
But the report also stated that the “NPO was silent about (its) security feature, claiming that the obscurity of (its ) technology is itself part of the security strategy.”
This in itself is suspect.
“Intense negotiations between Director Esmeralda Amora Ladra and her counterpart in NPO, Evelyn Perlado, resulted in a price drop from P2.90 to P2.20 per ballot for the security marks. “But there seems to be a corresponding decrease in NPO’s enthusiasm for using top quality anti-fraud technology.
“The latest word from NPO is that it will merely ride on the same ultraviolet technology of Smartmatic,” the TWG report stated.
The report was focused on the mandated duty of the Comelec to “prescribe the use or adoption of the latest technological and electronic devices” pursuant to subsection (i) of Section 52 of the Omnibus Election Code, and to “prevent the use of fake ballots” by ensuring the provision of “safeguards” pursuant to the second to the last paragraph of Section 13 of Republic Act No. 9369,” which states: To prevent the use of fake ballots, the Comelec through the (Steering) committee shall ensure that the necessary safeguards, such as, but not limited to, bar codes, holograms, color shifting, ink, microprinting, are provided on the ballot.
It will be recalled that just recently, news broke out that 2 million ballots ordered printed by the Comelec for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao had no security markings from the NPO.
This newsreport was quickly dismissed by the Comelec, whose officials claimed that there were enough security marks, and that the NPO security marks were merely an “additional layer,” since the bar code serves as the NPO’s security mark, plus that the Comelec had its own mark.
Apparently, since the TWG report says Comelec has no anti-fraud safeguard at all for the ballots, and that the NPO is merely riding on Smartmatic’s security marks, only Smartmatic has embedded the security mark in the ballot.
Smartmatic TIM had also earlier decided to use Kodak Versamark VL2000 to print all the ballots. Two proposals boasting of international stature, with claims of compatibility with the reclusive specifications of Kodak Versamark VL2000 remained: BTI eAdvantage Inc. and Nautilus Security Technologies.
“In gist, both proposals involve a combination of micro embedding or implanting secret images into the Portable Document Format (PDF) file that serves as the data which the Kodak Versamark VL2000 shall micro imprint onto each ballot. Our human eyes cannot see these secret images on the ballots unless we use special decoding lens.
“Thus, if a ballot unlawfully disappears and later reappears under questionable circumstances or for whatever reason, anyone may challenge the authenticity of the reappearing ballot. To prove or disprove authenticity, the investigating authority will use the decoding lens to check if the official hidden images are there. If the official hidden images do not appear through the decoding lens, the ballot under question is fake.
The head-on competition between BTI eAdvantage and Nautilus had been lingering for more than a year already, the report said, adding that as early as sometime before Oct. 25, 2008, the Administrative Services Department already made preliminary studies of the features of BTI eAdvantages, the partial result of which now forms part of the discussions in En Banc Resolution No. 08-1115 dated Nov. 11, 2008.
The Oct. 25, 2008 memorandum of ASD Director Julio Thaddeus Herman discusses the anti-counterfeiting solutions of BTI eAdvantage which offer several interlocking technologies, such as the Scrambled Indicia (SI); SI Doc-U-Lok Software; Stealth SI Authentication System; Stealth SI Software Application; SI Digital Authentication and the SI Web Decoder Authentication. This was covered by an en banc resolution.
Nautilus was said to have offered a proprietary software under United States Patent No. 2005141940 -- Authentic8 Hidden Image Security ? which does not require any special ink nor any special printer and yet it can encrypt up to three hidden images into one space. The group takes pride in being the security technology provider of no less than the United States Postal Service. Its other popular clients are Nokia, British American Tobacco, Valentino, Dolce & Gabana, John Galliano, and Bvlgari.
What appeared important is a requirement of the “active participation of the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) in the evaluation of the anti-counterfeiting proposals.”
Another en banc resolution required both BTI eAdvantages Inc. and Nautilus Security Technologies to submit to a study which the BAC would have to conduct in coordination with the Election Support Group.
It was pointed out by the TWG group that BTI eAdvantage has been “taking advantage” by conducting tests on the Kodak Versamark VL2000 printers in NPO without, however, informing the BAC and the Election Support Group when the basic protocol in en banc resolution was for both proponents to officially submit their proposals to the BAC. Thereafter, the BAC should supervise whatever compatibility test is necessary on the Kodak Versamark VL2000 printers.
The TWG also noted BTIE had been transacting directly with the NPO and BTIE was able to conduct test preparations sometime between Nov. 8, 2010 to Jan. 12, 2010, yet BTIE was silent and remains silent about the outcome of the test result.
To settle matters, the BAC and ESG gave both proponents equal opportunities to test run their respective features on the Kodak Versamark printers from Jan. 20 to 25 resulting in a successful demonstration by Nautilus. As to BTIE, it made a request for additional testings.
Meanwhile, another printer was acquired by Smartmatic to hasten the printing of the official ballots.
Gene Gregorio, spokesman for Smartmatic said the additional new printer was rented not because of a failure to meet its April 25 deadline but to ease the load of printing in the four rented machines.
“We are renting a fifth printer only to ease the load of printing and be more prepared but not because we are outside the deadline,” he said.
Smartmatic started printing the ballots last Feb. 8 using the VersaMark Kodak machines from Switzerland. Each printer can accomodate 200,000 ballots a day or a total of 800,000 for the four printers.
With the new printer, ballots being printed in the NPO will increase by 200,000 or a total of 1 million per day.
Gregorio said they have completed printing the ballots for the ARMM, Cagayan Valley and Region 4.
“Printing is in full swing and meeting the deadline,” Gregorio added.
With Marie Surbano
No comments:
Post a Comment