eVoting and you.
It seems that Diebold had a problem at the Iowa Straw poll and a few Ron Paul supporters are crying foul. I'm not really here to discuss the the fallout but more the ever increasing use of electronic voting and counting. How do you feel about it? Do you think it can ever be "trustworthy"? Are these "errors" eroding peoples confidence in the political system?
I was particularly heartened, at the time, to see eVoting not succeed in my country not because we think the Earth is flat but after much testing the system was found wanting. I, personally, flat out don't trust it. And yes I accept that fraud is possible in the paper system but it is far harder to pull off compared to a digital one. I also speak as an IT professional and a Poll clerk and counter for our elections so I feel I have a foot in both camps.
I once asked my father how he felt about it and his reply is what I use as my stock answer to eVoting. He said he routinely checks his banks statements and regularly finds errors in them. If banks can make errors what makes you think no one else can? Short answer: I now check my bank statements religiously.
Seeing as how California recently de-certified all electronic voting machines because all the ones they tested could be hacked into within 10 minutes, I don't have much confidence in them. Many of them run unpatched operating systems, are online when they don't need to be and aren't properly firewalled so they're easy targets. Here, we still use manual methods which is how I think it should stay until these systems can be designed an implemented with standards that ensure maximum security.
"We're taught from a young age how to dodge rock hard objects moving at incredible rates of speed while simultaneously beating folks half to death with sticks. We do this for fun." -kung fu grip
http://blog.digital-lifeline.ca
The beauty of the old paper ballot system is that votes can be tallied by just about anyone with basic arithmetic skills, and results transmitted over open and transparent channels.
The potential for interfering with my vote between the point where I put my little cross down and the moment that cross joins the millions of other crosses in the final result is small, and the points where tampering can happen are clear and controllable.
Electronic voting puts a black box in between me and the voting process. I have no idea what goes on inside that box. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I'm aware, voters typically have no access to the algorithms or hardware schematics. Therefore the provider of that box or any other malevolent third party could easily tamper with the process.
Transparency of the voting process is key, and the voter needs full awareness of where tampering can happen, so he can satisfy himself sufficient measures are being taken to prevent such tampering.
This means full details on both soft- and hardware of evoting equipment need to be completely public, and the whole still needs be tamperproof even after these details are known. If that can be guarateed, I'll e-vote. Until then I'll keep taking my trips to the ballot boxes or vote by mail.
Electronic voting can be secure, even more accurate and error-proof than paper ballots.
But as long as we're talking about Diebold... it's not.
NOTE: This is not a doodle bug.
Spore
Hacking Democracy
XBox Live|Tshirts|My Music|GameFly|xfire
The requisite Schneier links:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wit.html
What needs to be done:
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2006/10/71957
The task can be easily accomplished with a minimum of fuss by using open standards, open source, and correct security procedures with an accurate paper trail. The only thing standing in the way of doing electronic voting correctly is money and corruption. What elections office in their right mind would ever accept a machine that uses secret software for voting? Clearly, many people in the election system and in government are ok with that - indeed, they insist upon it. It's taken almost ten years to even get the machines reviewed in a relatively open way.
Remember: this conversation is just between you and me ... and the NSA.
MaverickDago wrote:
I was very glad to hear that all the electronic voting machines have been decertified here in California. The idea that the method a citizen's vote is tallied is a trade secret is absolutely absurd.
Electronic voting can be secure and accurate, but corporations have no place in running our elections for us. Transparency is absolutely necessary at every step. True security isn't too difficult to obtain, as long as it truly is the goal, which it can never be if the voting system is created for profit. Keep it as simple as possible, but err on the side on extra security and accountability: keep a paper trail which is printed at the time each vote is cast, do not use removable memory cards, physically disable internet or other transmission system until needed, and make both the hardware and software as open as possible.
Furthermore, keep the experience for the voter as simple as possible. Touchscreen systems that select the wrong candidate need to be replaced, with push-buttons and LCD displays if necessary. It's disheartening that a system that can tally negative votes, much less be hacked within a few minutes, hasn't received more outrage. Obviously, none of this is anything new, but the overall lack of change is astounding.
Steam ID: Anodyne