3 ms·

Why does America have alove affair with voting machines? What is wrong with paper and pencil?

by Marazan 11y ago

uptown 11y ago
Paper and pencil aren't a perfect solution either. This page shows a few examples of where things have gone wrong. http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2008/12/timewasters_the_ballots/ http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2008/12/timewasters_the_bal... In the case of the Florida Presidential vote, they ran into the problem of "hanging chads" where parts of the page that were intended to be fully punched-out so a machine could detect the vote were still attached to the page, leading to further scrutiny over deciphering the true intent of the voter's ballot.
- slasaus 11y ago
  That was not a pencil but still a lot of technology/mechanics. But you're right, paper and pencil are not perfect, just the most secure we can practically achieve these days and probably for the upcoming decade. See this video of J. Alex Halderman on e-voting in Estonia and about electronic voting in general [0]. (Halderman is a professor also known from the cold boot attack and the more recent vulnerabilities in a lot of Diffie-Hellman implementations). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY_pHvhE4os https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY_pHvhE4os
- Marazan 11y ago
  The chads was due to yet more voting machines not pencil and paper.
maxki 11y ago
The only reason I can think of, is that the " paper+pencil+sealed cardboard box" solution isn't good at giving lucrative contracts to buddies of election officials. The "speed of counting" argument does not hold : in Canada we get the final results of elections just a few hours after the closing of the vote. Tallying is all manual, and the counting of each box is done under the supervision of members of antagonistic parties.
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
Because it is easy to see how in a single case a paper and pencil vote can be cheated. Switching votes, a bad counter, throwing away some votes from the guy you don't like... all of these are easy to imagine. In comparison, the types of attacks needed to take out a voting machine seem much more complicated. And so many people seem to assume that this means that voting machines are more secure. In my own experience, most people who view it this way don't consider scaling. While pen and paper is an easier attack for a single voting station, it is far more difficult to scale. Every voting place brought in on the scheme has more people who could be caught or decide to go public, and that is assuming you are able to get in contact with those people in time to ensure they are able to intercept the voting. With voting machines, one good exploit, especially for wifi enabled machines, can easily infect larger numbers. As to why other countries don't have people viewing it this same way... I don't think it is because they have better ability to consider scaling attempts to exploit a system.

Why does America have alove affair with voting machines? What is wrong with paper and pencil?

by Marazan 11y ago

Why does America have alove affair with voting machines? What is wrong with paper and pencil?

Paper and pencil aren't a perfect solution either. This page shows a few examples of where things have gone wrong. http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2008/12/timewasters_the_ballots/ http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2008/12/timewasters_the_bal... In the case of the Florida Presidential vote, they ran into the problem of "hanging chads" where parts of the page that were intended to be fully punched-out so a machine could detect the vote were still attached to the page, leading to further scrutiny over deciphering the true intent of the voter's ballot.

slasaus 11y ago
That was not a pencil but still a lot of technology/mechanics. But you're right, paper and pencil are not perfect, just the most secure we can practically achieve these days and probably for the upcoming decade. See this video of J. Alex Halderman on e-voting in Estonia and about electronic voting in general [0]. (Halderman is a professor also known from the cold boot attack and the more recent vulnerabilities in a lot of Diffie-Hellman implementations). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY_pHvhE4os https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY_pHvhE4os
Marazan 11y ago
The chads was due to yet more voting machines not pencil and paper.

maxki 11y ago

The only reason I can think of, is that the " paper+pencil+sealed cardboard box" solution isn't good at giving lucrative contracts to buddies of election officials. The "speed of counting" argument does not hold : in Canada we get the final results of elections just a few hours after the closing of the vote. Tallying is all manual, and the counting of each box is done under the supervision of members of antagonistic parties.

Lawtonfogle 11y ago

Because it is easy to see how in a single case a paper and pencil vote can be cheated. Switching votes, a bad counter, throwing away some votes from the guy you don't like... all of these are easy to imagine. In comparison, the types of attacks needed to take out a voting machine seem much more complicated. And so many people seem to assume that this means that voting machines are more secure. In my own experience, most people who view it this way don't consider scaling. While pen and paper is an easier attack for a single voting station, it is far more difficult to scale. Every voting place brought in on the scheme has more people who could be caught or decide to go public, and that is assuming you are able to get in contact with those people in time to ensure they are able to intercept the voting. With voting machines, one good exploit, especially for wifi enabled machines, can easily infect larger numbers. As to why other countries don't have people viewing it this same way... I don't think it is because they have better ability to consider scaling attempts to exploit a system.