6 ms·

Voting Machines

32 points by aneesh 18y ago

rms 18y ago
It's really sad how corrupt the system is, yet I've learned to just dismiss it as an expression of existential angst because the corrupt system somehow seems to function anyways and I myself can't fix it. Yet. http://www.videosift.com/video/From-The-Programmers-Mouth-How-The-2000-Election-Was-Fixed http://www.videosift.com/video/From-The-Programmers-Mouth-Ho...
mlinsey 18y ago
Here's an analysis of machines used for the 2004 election. Some security experts were able to do a thorough review because the source code that Diebold wanted to keep secret from state governments was accidentally made available on a public server. Oops. http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf
sysop073 18y ago
I really can't imagine how we can use a closed-source voting system; I remember in March when Sequoia flipped out that a CS student was going to examine their machines and stopped him. Like that isn't at all suspicious http://sysop073.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-post-is-trade-secret.html http://sysop073.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-post-is-trade-secr...
- andreyf 18y ago
  ...use a closed-source voting system... Calling it "secret software" might help, as people can understand that (and why it's bad) without explanation. Public accountability requires no secret software.
vaksel 18y ago
At this point, how long before we'll be able to vote using the internet? Figure have people enter their social security number, date of birth, and the 20 digit randomly generated password that gets mailed a month before the election.
- simonw 18y ago
  Considering upwards of 10% of all end-user machines connected to the internet are part of a botnet, probably never.
  - andreyf 18y ago
    20 digit randomly generated password that gets mailed a month before the election Shouldn't this help with that? Also, internet-based voting doesn't have to mean you're using your own machines, just that you're using the internet to tally the vote. This could mean we have 100x the voting locations that we have now - one at every post office, public library, starbucks, what have you.
    - juanpablo 18y ago
      And then somebody could extort you to vote in certain way and remain at your side to make sure you comply... or steal your mail and vote for you.
      - vaksel 18y ago
        if someone wants to fix the election its really not that hard under the current system either. Dead people and pets vote all the time. Same with absentee ballots. And if its 1 address, 1 SSN, 1 password at least the person will need a little bit more info to fix it. If they steal your mail they'll still need to know your date of birth and the social security #. And sure thats possible for 1-2 people, but do you realize how hard it would be to do it on the massive scale? I mean lets face it, voting is a pain in the ass, you usually end up voting when its rush hour, and you have to wait a long time to cast your vote. Something like 40% of the eligible voters even bother to vote. Shouldn't it be a priority to make voting easier?
        mynameishere 18y ago
        Dead people and pets vote all the time Yeah, zombie granny and fluffy's backing of John Kerry basically cancelled out our household vote.
hugh 18y ago
Y'know, I hate to come to your country and tell you how to run your elections, but I really think the best way to do it is the way we do it in Australia. You go to the ballot box, and you get a pencil, and a printed ballot sheet with a standardised design nationwide. You write little numbers (we have preferential voting) in little boxes, and stick it in a box. No hacking, no tampering, no confusion, no breakdowns, and no lining up for more than a couple of minutes.
- LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
  From what I hear, American elections involve many more votes than most other nations. At my local polls, the semiannual elections contain ballots for 5 or six different districts (federal, state, county, town, school district, fire district, police district) as well as referendums on several tax proposals and even things like road improvement projects. There are votes to sustain the currently elected Judges in my court district, and votes for positions like tax assessors. I'm sure I'm missing a few. Seriously, it's a lot of votes. My voting district uses Scantron ballots which are nice because you do fill out a paper form, which is tallied on the spot. You get the paper trail of a paper ballot, with the speed of an electronic system.
  - hugh 18y ago
    So you'd have to fill out eight ballot papers instead of our two or three. Or perhaps, you'd fill out a single perforated ballot paper and it would be ripped apart before counting. I've seen Australian ballot papers which are about three feet by one foot, and list a few hundred candidates for the state upper house (later they changed the law to make it harder to get on the ballot sheet). Anyway, if we can cope with that, I'm sure you guys could cope with having multiple elections on one big perforated sheet. The Scantron system actually sounds sensible enough though. If that were implemented nationwide it would be a good system. But I can't understand this district-by-district (or is it county-by-county?) disparity of voting schemes.
    - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
      Oh, it does sound like you have a good number of entries on your ballots. Sorry for making assumptions. To be honest I've never voted in an election which didn't use Scantron ballots. I believe the voting devices are selected and allocated on a state-by-state basis though. The federal law mandates certain requirements the states must meet but leaves the implementation up to each individual one. I've lived in North Carolina, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Utah, and used Scantrons in each location. Maybe the computerized systems are used in more urban or wealthy districts?
stcredzero 18y ago
Why aren't high security requirements apps deployed on hardware that's completely incapable of modifying its own code? There's no reason why you have to have the dev environment on the target machine. It might be more convenient, but for high security, it just doesn't seem like a good idea. One possible answer: general purpose architectures are cheaper due to economies of scale.

32 points by aneesh 18y ago

rms 18y ago

It's really sad how corrupt the system is, yet I've learned to just dismiss it as an expression of existential angst because the corrupt system somehow seems to function anyways and I myself can't fix it. Yet. http://www.videosift.com/video/From-The-Programmers-Mouth-How-The-2000-Election-Was-Fixed http://www.videosift.com/video/From-The-Programmers-Mouth-Ho...

mlinsey 18y ago

Here's an analysis of machines used for the 2004 election. Some security experts were able to do a thorough review because the source code that Diebold wanted to keep secret from state governments was accidentally made available on a public server. Oops. http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf

sysop073 18y ago

I really can't imagine how we can use a closed-source voting system; I remember in March when Sequoia flipped out that a CS student was going to examine their machines and stopped him. Like that isn't at all suspicious http://sysop073.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-post-is-trade-secret.html http://sysop073.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-post-is-trade-secr...

andreyf 18y ago
...use a closed-source voting system... Calling it "secret software" might help, as people can understand that (and why it's bad) without explanation. Public accountability requires no secret software.

vaksel 18y ago

At this point, how long before we'll be able to vote using the internet? Figure have people enter their social security number, date of birth, and the 20 digit randomly generated password that gets mailed a month before the election.

simonw 18y ago
Considering upwards of 10% of all end-user machines connected to the internet are part of a botnet, probably never.
- andreyf 18y ago
  20 digit randomly generated password that gets mailed a month before the election Shouldn't this help with that? Also, internet-based voting doesn't have to mean you're using your own machines, just that you're using the internet to tally the vote. This could mean we have 100x the voting locations that we have now - one at every post office, public library, starbucks, what have you.
  - juanpablo 18y ago
    And then somebody could extort you to vote in certain way and remain at your side to make sure you comply... or steal your mail and vote for you.
    - vaksel 18y ago
      if someone wants to fix the election its really not that hard under the current system either. Dead people and pets vote all the time. Same with absentee ballots. And if its 1 address, 1 SSN, 1 password at least the person will need a little bit more info to fix it. If they steal your mail they'll still need to know your date of birth and the social security #. And sure thats possible for 1-2 people, but do you realize how hard it would be to do it on the massive scale? I mean lets face it, voting is a pain in the ass, you usually end up voting when its rush hour, and you have to wait a long time to cast your vote. Something like 40% of the eligible voters even bother to vote. Shouldn't it be a priority to make voting easier?
      - mynameishere 18y ago
        Dead people and pets vote all the time Yeah, zombie granny and fluffy's backing of John Kerry basically cancelled out our household vote.

hugh 18y ago

Y'know, I hate to come to your country and tell you how to run your elections, but I really think the best way to do it is the way we do it in Australia. You go to the ballot box, and you get a pencil, and a printed ballot sheet with a standardised design nationwide. You write little numbers (we have preferential voting) in little boxes, and stick it in a box. No hacking, no tampering, no confusion, no breakdowns, and no lining up for more than a couple of minutes.

LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
From what I hear, American elections involve many more votes than most other nations. At my local polls, the semiannual elections contain ballots for 5 or six different districts (federal, state, county, town, school district, fire district, police district) as well as referendums on several tax proposals and even things like road improvement projects. There are votes to sustain the currently elected Judges in my court district, and votes for positions like tax assessors. I'm sure I'm missing a few. Seriously, it's a lot of votes. My voting district uses Scantron ballots which are nice because you do fill out a paper form, which is tallied on the spot. You get the paper trail of a paper ballot, with the speed of an electronic system.
- hugh 18y ago
  So you'd have to fill out eight ballot papers instead of our two or three. Or perhaps, you'd fill out a single perforated ballot paper and it would be ripped apart before counting. I've seen Australian ballot papers which are about three feet by one foot, and list a few hundred candidates for the state upper house (later they changed the law to make it harder to get on the ballot sheet). Anyway, if we can cope with that, I'm sure you guys could cope with having multiple elections on one big perforated sheet. The Scantron system actually sounds sensible enough though. If that were implemented nationwide it would be a good system. But I can't understand this district-by-district (or is it county-by-county?) disparity of voting schemes.
  - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
    Oh, it does sound like you have a good number of entries on your ballots. Sorry for making assumptions. To be honest I've never voted in an election which didn't use Scantron ballots. I believe the voting devices are selected and allocated on a state-by-state basis though. The federal law mandates certain requirements the states must meet but leaves the implementation up to each individual one. I've lived in North Carolina, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Utah, and used Scantrons in each location. Maybe the computerized systems are used in more urban or wealthy districts?

stcredzero 18y ago

Why aren't high security requirements apps deployed on hardware that's completely incapable of modifying its own code? There's no reason why you have to have the dev environment on the target machine. It might be more convenient, but for high security, it just doesn't seem like a good idea. One possible answer: general purpose architectures are cheaper due to economies of scale.