Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Inside Electronic Voting Machines

Posted by michael on from the vote-for-buchanan dept.

Alien54 and several other people wrote in about a couple of stories published in a New Zealand webzine: an examination of an electronic voting system, and some less interesting political speculation about it. Diebold voting systems are in fairly wide use, and apparently provide zero security to keep election officials from writing in whatever election totals they want.

2 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. What ever happened to the concern? by dachshund · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It amazes me. After the 2000 elections, every expert in the world pretty much agreed that electronic voting technology should not be deployed unless safeguards were added, and they went to great lengths to enumerate those safeguards.

    Three years later, and it seems that equipment manufacturers have managed to blithely ignore every bit of it. And apparently, so have the people purchasing the stuff.

  2. Re:Diebold. by homer_ca · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As bad as ATM security might be, they're still better than voting machines in one way. There's a paper trail. They print a paper receipt for the user and print an internal receipt for its own records. IMHO a paper trail is even more important than open source or code review.