Slashdot Mirror
Online Voting In 2004 To Require Windows
letxa2000 writes "According to this article at CBS, a trial Internet voting system will be made available to 100,000 voters in 2004--particularly military and overseas U.S. citizens. As an American living overseas I think this is a step in the right direction. But the article also says 'Voters using SERVE can register to vote and cast their ballots from any computer using Microsoft Windows with Internet access.' Why the Windows requirement? Is that really going to make online voting secure?"
If they're testing the system with military voters, than using Windows is probably the only choice. There are a lot of bases where the desktop platform, by directive, is Windows. Running alternative software can be a violation of policy and mean Real Trouble(tm) for military members. They're not going to court martial anybody, but it can be a black eye on your record.
This is somewhat unrelated, but still an interesting comment on their page:
*Phew*...> UPDATE candidates SET votes="0"
> WHERE name="Your Opposing Candidate";
ERROR: Attribute "0" not found
Better check your SQL before going into voter fraud.
Perfectly valid Microsoft Access SQL.
Surely the new system will be run on Access?
http://jesus.everdense.com/
There is nothing in the article which suggests that Windows is a requirement. It just says that you can access it from any Windows box with internet access. That means that Windows is sufficient, but it doesn't say it's necessary .
What they're trying to address in the article is that since most people use Windows, then most people are going to want to know that they can access it from their home computers.
It's like telling people they can get somewhere in a Ford. That doesn't mean they can't get there in a Chevy or a Nissan.
Hidden passwords are not obscurity. They're just unknown data.
/etc/passwd or /etc/shadow is known, the format of those files is explained in a man page, and you even have mkpasswd(1) to encode passwords in the same was as in /etc/passwd. And still, I bet you can't get a password without using a bug or brute force.
/etc/passwd with passwords in it is quite secure if users use good passwords. Unfortunately that doesn't happen often.
On Linux, the source code of login(1) and su(1) is known, the algorhitm used to encode the password in
Even word readable
Make sure to count the number of voters, not the number of people.
a rtin/general /government/sld003.htmo ntent.asp?section=gen&do cument=res_table04&dir=rep/dec3097&lang=e&textonly =falseo n=gen&do cument=stat17&dir=rep/sta&lang=e&anchor=1&textonly =false
Assuming turnout rates similar to 1996/1997.. I don't have US figures for 2000, but Canada's dropped 6% from 1997 to 2000.
Canadian voters: 32,207,113 * 0.67 = 21,578,766
US voters: 270,000,000 * 0.488 = 131,760,000
Only 6 times as many voters! =)
I like our voting system, it's simple and pretty much foolproof. It might take a little more organizing, but I don't see why it wouldn't scale further. The votes are hand counted at each local polling station, I believe. Results are sent by computer to Elections Canada.
Sources:
http://www.nwmissouri.edu/nwcourses/m
http://www.elections.ca/c
http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?secti
Bitchslapped. Neat.