Evoting in India, Maryland

Anonymous Coward writes "EVMs are back in the news again. The BBC is reporting on the use of over a million Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) in India for Parliamentary elections in April. With a billion people and an electorate of 668 million, it is by far the largest democratic election exercise in the world. A picture of an EVM is provided." And Kierthos writes "An article on Yahoo! News mentions that Maryland's voting terminals will be wrapped in tamper proof tape, which 'just protects that malicious code physically', according to computer scientist Avi Rubin. Also mentioned are California's ongoing system of e-voting, as well as a point on whether Diebold should be banned in California after using uncertified software in last October's election."

Comments

hmm

[ghettoboy22]

If the "tamper proof" tape is what I think it is, that would only show if someone broke the seal. If this happens, does that mean all votes on that machine are thrown out as unreliable? That sure creates the possibility of someone, not liking how pre-election polls are showing their favored candidate, intentionally breaking the seal to throw a wrench as it were into the election. I must be missing something there.....

As far as the overall debate on e-voting, I like how they do it here in Alaska. It's the old "fill in the bubble" tests like you used to take in school. You fill in the bubble on the ballot, which the ballot itself is very well laid out, then when you're done you feed the ballot into an electronic counter which keeps a tally there on the spot. When the polls close, an election worker connects the machine to a phone line, the machine then dials out and reports the results for that precinct. Results are all in w/in ~2-3 hours of the polls closing, and there is defiantly a paper trail that can be followed, if need be.

Re:hmm

[Ian Wolf]

If the "tamper proof" tape is what I think it is, that would only show if someone broke the seal. If this happens, does that mean all votes on that machine are thrown out as unreliable? That sure creates the possibility of someone, not liking how pre-election polls are showing their favored candidate, intentionally breaking the seal to throw a wrench as it were into the election. I must be missing something there.....

Well it wouldn't necessarily affect the final results, unless the machines were labeled "Republican", "Democrat", and "Nader Voters". Of course, it would still make a major mess, probably not have a reliable paper trail for hand counting, and in general cause another "Florida" all over again.

Re:hmm

[BuckaBooBob]

Maryland's voting terminals will be wrapped in tamper proof tape.

Cool does it come with that Magic Server Pixie Dust and a Universal Business Adapter (That actually does require an adapter to connect to a unix machine) and some of those other cool Gizmo's on IBM's commericals?

Re:hmm

[wmspringer]

With the elections being as close as they have been, shutting down machines in a few heavily [democratic|republican] districts could easily change the results of the election. You may not know exactly what each individual machine has recorded, but it's easy enough to find areas that you can expect to reliably vote for one of the major parties. If you were to get the results from machines in Denver thrown out, for example, who do you think would benefit?

Re:hmm

[Lemmy Caution]

You can identify some districts as "heavily Democrat," "heavily Republican," etc and tamper accordingly.

Re:hmm

[the_skywise]

This whole argument (aside from the Diebold fiasco(s) ) stems from the Florida Election of 2000 fiasco.

Florida used punch cards. Punch out the perforated block, bingo you've voted.
The fiaso occurred because, what constiuted a "vote" was being subjectviely defined... by whatever party happened to be reading the ballot. Some puches were partially knocked out. Did that constitute a vote? If so, if there was one punch out for one candidate and a partial punch for another, did that invalidate the vote or did it count for the whole punch or the partial one?

On top of that, while they were handling the ballots during the recount, some of the punch outs were coming off!

And don't think you're safe with your pencil and paper! Oh no! It's politics. Any side will find anyway to hem and haw about interpretations of rules and ballots.

That's what partially kicked off this whole EVoting craze in the US. To try to prevent such a thing from occurring again.

Re:hmm

[Mr. Slippery]

Well it wouldn't necessarily affect the final results, unless the machines were labeled "Republican", "Democrat", and "Nader Voters".

No...they'd be labeled "Prince George's County", "Harford County", etcetera, (actually you'd know down to the voting precint, even better) which is enough to tell you "mostly Republican", "mostly Democrat", etcetera. All you have to do is throw out more votes from one side than the other, after all.

Re:hmm

[Ian Wolf]

For some inexplicable reason I didn't think of that.

Well the simple solutiong is tamper tape on top of tamper tape. ;) I bet somebody brought that up in a meeting somewhere.

Re:hmm

[wmspringer]

>Well the simple solution is tamper tape on top of tamper tape. ;)

This could get recursive really fast.. :-)

Re:hmm

[Ian Wolf]

"I don't know that pencil mark is outside the line." *stops peering through magnifying glass* "I think its safe to assume that we cannot determine the voter's intent."

Re:hmm

[kfg]

And the real problem with the 2000 election is one that is not often addressed directly, but is ceratainly relavant to the current topic.

All voting is a statistical process. No system is perfect, there will always be errors. Thus the system has a margin of error.

The 2000 vote was the problem it was because the vote was inside the margin of error, thus no amount of fiddling, recounting, whatever, could possibly resolve the issue. Statistically speaking, the vote was a dead heat and the only reason it had to be decided by the dead heat in Florida was because it was a dead heat pretty much everywhere else as well.

In terms of the "problem" this is indicative of the choices of candidates being a coin toss to most of the populace, which is, essentially, how we resolved it. By using technology to reduce the margin of error we can avoid the political brouhaha of coin toss elections by allowing one candidate to "win" by 20 votes or some such, but it does nothing to cure the political problems that lead to such dead heat elections in the first place.

Do you want Frog ala Peche, or Peche ala Frog?

Not to mention the problem inherent in such elections where a goodly portion of the voting populace look at the opposing candidates, flip their coin, look at it, then just say "Fuck it, it doesn't even matter," and stay home on election day.

Give us statistically descernable candidates and we just might have election results statistically significant.

Of course, to the candidates themselves such an idea is anathema.

KFG

Re:hmm

[Monkelectric]

Actually they did things LIKE that in florida -- in counties with electronic voting machines. In black neigborhoods (democratic) voting machines were configured to accept an invalid ballot and throw it away without telling the voter. In republican districts, the machines notified the voter and allowed them to correct their mistakes.

Re:hmm

[SpaceLifeForm]

No, it's been proven that the more tape you tape the slower it tapes.

Re:hmm

[MoonBuggy]

If you're going down that line of election rigging, you don't even need to break the tape. Just walk past the machines with a fair size magnet and you should do a good job of frying/invalidating the screens and/or memory.

Don't mod this funny BTW, I'm deadly serious and AFAICS it's quite possible.

Re:hmm

[betelgeuse-4]

With pencil and paper it's easier to give explicit details of what constitutes a vote and make it clear to the voters what they need to do. Example: Each candidate has a box directly to the right of their name (for the really stupid the correct way up is indicated on the slip). A cross (other marks aren't acceptable) must be placed within the box for the candidate you wish to vote for. Marks made outside the box or in multiple boxes invalidate the voting slip.

This may seem a little strict, but provided the voters are properly informed there really shouldn't be any problems. But this is the real world, so of course there would be :)

Re:hmm

[Imperator]

While I agree with you that some election results are really too close to be considered statistically significant, the solution for presidential elections is actually quite simple. Get rid of the winner-takes-all system that all states (but Maine) use for choosing their electors. If Gore and Bush had just split Florida's electors 50-50, the whole debacle could have been avoided. Or better yet, get rid of the whole Electoral College system entirely and use a nationwide popular vote. The more voters you have, the less likely the election will be decided by a few thousand confused elderly voters in Florida. It would also mean that those of us who don't live in "swing states" stop getting ignored by presidential campaigns.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

God bless America, huh?

Re:hmm

[kfg]

Unfortunately a popular vote system would mean that almost all states but California and New York become largely ignorable. I'm afraid that, despite being a New Yorker myself, I see exactly same problems with a popular vote system that the founding fathers did. New York and California dictating law to Montana and Rhode Island will only lead to injustice and more states being "ignored" than are now.

I like states. I like states rights and equality under law of states. Hence I'm inclined to keep the electoral college system, although I believe it may need some fine tuning.

KFG

Re:hmm

[Kaboom13]

Where does this BS come from? I live in South Florida, and watched the election debacle firsthand. Despite following closely, I never heard these stories direct from a credible source, instead they started to show up long after it was over from various crackpots. Please present evidence, cause I'd like to have our (democratic) supervisor of elections arrested if it's true. The reality of the matter is nothing really unusual happened, it just so happened Florida turned it's vote in last so Florida became the fighting ground. If you believe voting is actually 100% accurate anywhere you are deluding yourself.

Re:hmm

[newhoggy]

Does anyone else see a problem with the outcome decided by only 20 votes? I mean, those 20 votes are hardly representative of the electorate and we do supposedly live in a 'representative democracy'.

Practical issues aside, if the vote is that close, isn't the most 'representative' option to elect half a candidate each for first and second place?

Re:hmm

[Behrooz]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0527-03.ht m

http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story /0 ,2763,501882,00.html

The official responsible for overseeing voting records and other similar issues is the Florida Secretary of State. At the time of most of the voter roll purges before the 2000 election, the Secretary was Katharine Harris, who also happened to end up as the head of the Bush campaign in Florida. Hint: Not a democrat.

Fortunately, she's no longer the Secretary of State for Florida.

Unfortunately, that came about as a side effect of her election to the US House of Representatives in the 13th Congressional District of Florida.

Re:hmm

[bill_beeman]

Unfortunately, the sources cited by Behrooz fail to back his assertions....

The first site is purporting to be repeating a newspaper story (long after the election) complaining that Florida's attempts to minimize illegal voting by convicted felons was overbroad.

The second cite (to the Guardian, only slightly more reliable a source than the National Inquirer)is a bad URL.

Note that the original assertions in this thread were not relfected in news at the time, and not supported by any of the multiple media studies of the Florida election outcome.

Perhaps it's tinfoil hat time.....

Re:hmm

[radicalskeptic]

It's not a bad url. perhaps you didn't remove the space? Try this.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

The second cite (to the Guardian, only slightly more reliable a source than the National Inquirer)is a bad URL.

Remove the space that slashdot places in long text-strings, you dolt. BTW, the Guardian is a well-regarded newspaper, with real essay-style journalism--you get more content and analysis from a single Guardian issue than a week's worth of USA Today.

The linked article is actually quite short, and summarizes a Washington Post article on the report of the US Civil Rights commission investigation of Florida voting disenfanchisement. Given that the event occurred 3 years ago, the poster had to use a news source that keeps their articles up for years.

Re:hmm

[Ubi_NL]

intentionally breaking the seal to throw a wrench

Yep, just like when someone breaks the seal on the box in which we all throw the voting cards.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like to point that that Nebraska also allows its electoral votes to be split between candidates.

So Maine and Nebraska... 2 out of 50 ain't bad right?

Re:hmm

[bcboy]

The 2000 vote was the problem it was because the vote was inside the margin of error, thus no amount of fiddling, recounting, whatever, could possibly resolve the issue.

This isn't true. The notion of a recount is a misnomer. The machines have a fairly high ballot rejection rate. In particular, if the voter punches part of the ballot incorrectly, the whole thing is skipped by the machines. By (state) law the ballot is supposed to be counted if the intent of the voter is clear. So parts of the ballot that are marked correctly are supposed to be counted, but they have to be counted by hand.

This process was spun in the media as recounting, when in fact the ballots had never been counted. This is the process that was blocked by rioting Republicans flown in by the party. The rejection rate is higher in lower income areas in part because the machines are of lower quality, meaning that without a hand count votes from lower income areas count for less (more of them dropped by the machines).

The election in Florida wasn't really that close.

Re:hmm

[blockhouse]

What worries me is the mechanics of voting in Maryland. The election judge is supposed to give you a card with a stripe of magnetic tape, you slide it into the voting machine to turn it on, you mark your ballot electronically, you vote, you give the card back to the election judge.

My question is: what's to stop me from sliding that card into the machine and voting four or five times?

Does anyone else get the idea that this process was not very well thought out at all?

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

And is it also Electro Magnetic Pulse resistant?

Re:hmm

[Rocinante]

Unfortunately a popular vote system would mean that almost all states but California and New York become largely ignorable.

As opposed to the current system, where all but a half-dozen "swing states" are largely ignorable? In 2000 I was registerd to vote in New Jersey; I could just as well have not voted, because Gore won in a walk like everybody knew he was going to (not that I'm complaining about that result, mind you; I would have taken, and would still take, anybody over the ape-in-a-suit we have now).

I like state's rights too, but the current system really isn't doing much to serve them. I would rather we started taking the 10th amendment seriously again, rather than relying on the anachronistic electoral college.

Re:hmm

[kfg]

What on earth have apes ever done to you to deserve such disrespect?

KFG

Re:hmm

[Sivaram_Velauthapill]

Yeah... proportional representation is the way to go. That will be closer to true democracy. Anything else is an attempt to euqalize the smaller districts, which often leads to side-effects.

Having said that, it isn't happening in USA any time soon. It is in the interest of the two dominant parties to keep it as it is.

Sivaram Velauthapillai

Re:hmm

[CharlieG]

Ahhh - it would be easy to influence, because the machines in some areas are as GOOD as labeled!

Remember, most Election Districts are VERY predictable, and it's part of what makes "calling" an election from Exit polling more "fun"

For instance, almost ALL EDs in NYC will vote Democratic (North Eastern Queens sometimes goes the other way), Nassau County usually goes Republican. Want to throw out a few hundred votes of one type or the other - work that info - if Nassau goes Democratic - it doesn't matter how much you tamper - it's a landslide. Ditto is, lets say, Co Op City in the bronx goes Republican, you can forget about the Democrat winning.

Remember,with 80% of the voters, we KNOW how they will vote 4 years in advance - it's that other 10% that are "in play", and they are NOT evenly distributed - not even CLOSE

Which is why, once the primaries are over, most states will never see the candidates again - the state is a lock

Re:hmm

[term8or]

IMHO in the UK the questions are:

1. How do we make sure that EV is secure?
2. How do we make sure that EV is reliable?
3. How do we make sure that EV is accurate?


EV needs to be seen to work as well as paper based alternatives. This is hard to do when the BBC has reported security violations by hackers, the florida fiasco, various interesting comments by Diebold employees etc.

Personally, in the UK I can't see EV catching on unless there is a paper trail, faultless physical security, and no chance of hackers breaking into the system. Which would make it cost about as much as the paper systems.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

>(to the Guardian, only slightly more reliable a source than the National Inquirer)

This is utter falsehood. The Guardian, typos aside, is a superb investigative newspaper that's very careful about balance. 'Course, it don't like Junior Bush much, and Blair, but that's not necessarily a bad thing, right?

Re:hmm

[Chris Mattern]

> Get rid of the winner-takes-all system that all states

Doesn't solve the problem. It means that we wouldn't've had the problem in 2000, but that's just because it shifts the problem to other situations, where you're doing recounts to scrape together the deciding votes in several states...

> Or better yet, get rid of the whole Electoral College system entirely and
> use a nationwide popular vote.

That makes the problem less likely, but makes it much worse when it happens. Imagine a national dead-heat vote. Now you have to attempt recounts not just of Florida, but the entire nation...

Chris Mattern

Re:hmm

[Chris Mattern]

> The election in Florida wasn't really that close.

Yep, Bush won it pretty easily, as independent recounts after the fact showed.

Chris Mattern

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people live in Alaska?

Re:hmm

[tmcmsail]

Of course, the radical leftists forget that the liberal media called Florida 20 minutes before the polls closed in the panhandle (Central time zone and very heavily Republican). The left seems to forget they they are the ones that were attempting to steal the election, like Chicago in 1960, Baltimore in the 90's, etc. Oh, and the Florida newspapers re-counted and again, Bush won. I guess they should listen to thier hacks and "move on" already.....

Re:hmm

[mandie]

Ok, I was wondering about that when I saw a speciman machine here in Montgomery Co., MD. I asked the county elections guy giving the demonstration what would happen if I brought a really strong magnet with me in my purse and set my purse down on the machine. He wasn't sure. I told him that a magnet I'd used to erase hard drives at an old job would have fit into my medium-sized purse.

I'm guessing this has not been pursued, or he felt that not revealing what kind of shielding was being used was a security measure.

Maybe I should have voted absentee in case he drops by my precinct or something "funny" happens there...

Re:hmm

[mandie]

The cards here in Mongomery County looked like SmartCards. The election judges have little devices they use to authorize the cards for each voter, and these devices give whether a particular authorization has been used yet or not.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to the current system, where all but a half-dozen "swing states" are largely ignorable?

The current system isn't perfect, but it at least levels the playing field a bit more then popular vote would.

Re:hmm

[mr100percent]

BBC Newsnight- What really happened in Florida?
Watch in RealPlayer. (Really good, the election officials run away when asked about excluding democratic votes)

This was a big story. A very large portion of the UK now feels that Bush stole the election unfairly. A number of American journalists were afraid to run the same story, which is why it appeared in BBC first (and maybe only).

Re:hmm

[mr100percent]

If someone broke the seal, they could bring officials down who would carefully inspect the machine's innards, with witnesses.

If they saw no evidence that anything was disturbed, then they could just continue like it was a false alarm. Or they could void all the votes on the machine. However, I have no idea how easy tampering would be to spot. Perhaps the majority of the time they would just void it, who knows.

But then again, who would have enough time to mess around with the machine? Maybe if they gave a 45 second time limit...

Re:hmm

[redaphid]

Montgomery County, MD: TrueVoteMD announced plans for protest inside and outside of key voting precincts on March 2, Primary Day. Voters are insisting that they be allowed to vote on paper ballots so their votes will be counted and to make a statement that they do not support the use of paperless electronic voting machines i.e. electronic elections without a voter verified paper record for independent audits and recounts.

TrueVoteMD picketers will be carrying signs that feature Uncle Sam asking, Will Your VoteCount? Demand A Paper Ballot as well as signs directed at the Chairs of the key committees, Delegate Sheila Hixson of Montgomery County and Senator Paula Hollinger of Baltimore County. The voters group will also be handing out literature describing the security and other problems with the electronic machines and how to demand a paper ballot. See www.TrueVoteMD.org to see the flyers and Uncle Sam posters.

Demonstrations of opposition to the paperless voting machines will continue inside the voting precinct as well. Voters will be demanding provisional paper ballots because the machines are insecure and without an independent voter verified paper audit record there is no way to conduct independent audits or recounts. TrueVoteMD is sponsoring an Election Day Hotline for voters who want assistance in speaking with their election judges.

We will not let the Board of Elections legitimize these machines by forcing us to vote on them, claimed Linda Schade, a co-director of TrueVoteMD. We are demanding paper ballots. If they refuse, it clearly shows they know that voters, if given the choice, will choose paper over electronic ballots. If they deny us our right to have our votes counted, we will file formal complaints against the State for using unacceptable paperless voting machines.

Last week, the City of Takoma Park, Maryland passed a resolution encouraging passage of the House and Senate paper trail bills (HB53 and SB393) requiring voter verified paper audit trails. Takoma Park Mayor wrote the Board of Elections asking that the citizens of Takoma Park be given the choice of paper ballots on Primary Day.

Montgomery County Demonstration:7600 Flower Ave. (near Carroll Avenue) at11:30am 1:00pm. Among the speakers, Marc Elrich, the sponsor of the Takoma Park Resolution. in Delegate Hixson's district
Contact on Tuesday Linda Schade 703-981-3619 cell

Baltimore County Demonstration: [precinct address to be announced], 3:00pm to 4:30pm in Senator Hollinger's district
Contact on Tuesday Bob Ferraro240-899-0263 cell

Annapolis City Demonstration: 8am event at Bates Middle School 7001 Chase Avenue. Picketing til noon.
Contact on Tuesday Rob Tufts 443-838-4963.

Carrol County Demonstration: details to be announced.

Campaign forVerifiable Voting in Maryland
www.TrueVoteMD.org 7711 GarlandAve.,Takoma Park, MD 20912 301-270-6150

Tamper-proof tape?

[Derling Whirvish]

Oh riiighht. All you have to do to prevent tampering with an on-line computer is to "wrap it in tamper-proof tape." Sure. Uh huh.

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[NeuroManson]

That reminds me of the good ol' days when people would put condoms on their floppy disks to prevent themselves from catching computer viruses.

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[NanoGator]

"Oh riiighht. All you have to do to prevent tampering with an on-line computer is to "wrap it in tamper-proof tape." Sure. Uh huh."

Sadly, they still use that in the future. It didn't keep anybody out of Mr. Spock's quarters.

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 80 -j TAMPER-PROOF

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[houstonbofh]

Shhh... That is one of the new security features in XP SP2! Keep it under wraps!

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[Antibozo]

Oh riiighht. All you have to do to prevent tampering with an on-line computer is to "wrap it in tamper-proof tape." Sure. Uh huh.

I've followed the developments in Maryland closely, and what's been noticeably absent from every report I've seen on the subject has been any discussion of what the consequences would be if the tamper-proof tape shows tampering.

More to the point: can anyone disenfranchise a whole bunch of voters by just damaging the tape, deliberately or accidentally, while voting?

Re:Tamper-proof tape?

[SpaceLifeForm]

Exactly, they've got it all wrong. They should use that plastic they wrap CDs in.

Not even close to how it is in Brazil...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody talks about electronic vote - just look at Brazil. I'm 30 years old, have been voting for 12, and have never voted on paper. They've been doing this for a long long time there, and did so in the last presidential election 2 years ago.

This is how we vote in Brazil (google translate from portuguese):

http://www.tre-mg.gov.br/eleicoes/simulacao_de_vot acao_na_urna_ele.htm

Re:Not even close to how it is in Brazil...

[pangian]

Electronic voting in Brazil is the perfect example of why its important to have users (in this case citizens) involved in the development of a new technology that is supposedly designed to "make their lives easier/better."

The same machines that are used and trusted in Brasil were used in Angola in 1992. However, in Angola (then political party and later rebel group) UNITA claimed that the machines spewed out fraudulent results, resulting in a bloody civil war that only recently ended.

Decertified in Wisconsin

[bmasel]

Somehow, none of the articles ever mention that the Wisconsin State Elections Board decertified unverifiable touchscreen systems after I convinced them a year ago. Too far ahead of the curve, I guess.

The Executive Director's report

stupid stupid

[SteveXE]

I dont get why its so hard for them to secure these damn things, why dont they use a custom os and custom software and lock the damn source in a vault where nobody can get it. This is far to important to leave unsecure, if they cant promise 100% unhackable voting then they shouldnt use it period.

Re:stupid stupid

[wmspringer]

1) A custom OS WILL have bugs. All new software does. Do you want to vote on buggy software?

2) Part of the outcry (at least here) against e-voting is exactly that - that nobody can see the source, which means we have no way of knowing if it's correct, if it has backdoors, etc.

3) Nothing is 100%, expecially when people are involved.

Re:stupid stupid

[ejaw5]

Who's to say the source doesn't contains election-rigging code, and locking it up so no one can review it. Even if it was "open source", someone at each poll location would have to review the source and compile it there in front of a few officials just to make sure no one loads a malicious binary. That may not even prevent a code snippet:
while(1)
{
voteRepublican();
}
from being sneaked in to the source undetected.

Re:stupid stupid

[berkeleyjunk]

Dude,
It cannot be. If the guy/gal is smart enough to write 2 lines of C code he/she cannot be republican.

Cheers
Junk

Re:stupid stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at Aviel Rubin's research paper @ http://www.avirubin.com/vote/ which details how the researchers got hold of Diebold's source code and alarmed the public about how buggy it was (which means that if no one had reviewed the source code, a hacker could theortically exploit it and you would be left wondering at the results). The most basic principal of security (as its taught) says that security by obscurity is NO SECURITY at all.

Don't you realize...

[Anonymous Coward]

...everything's secure when you use Duct Tape!

Voting in India

[andy1307]

Each party has a symbol e.g. Elephant, Lotus, wheel etc. If you want to vote for the ruling BJP, you press the button next to the Lotus. That's how they have electronic voting even with the illiteracy problem.

Re:Voting in India

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to vote for the ruling BJP

Blow-Job Party? Here, we call them Democrats.

Re:Voting in India

[tarunthegreat]

Not that u care but BJP stands for Bharatiya Janata Party = The Indian People's Party.... I guess BlowJobParty does sound better. Question: Do the candidates receive or give? If it's give..I'll vote...

Diebold again?

[wmspringer]

After everything we've heard about Diebold in the past few months - thier ties to Bush, uncertified software, etc - does anyone really trust them to accurately count and record the results of the votes?

Maybe the states that are still using Diebold machines know something I don't, but I really don't see why you'd want to take such a risk with something as important as voting.

Re:Diebold again?

[PetWolverine]

The problem is that they don't want to take any risk--in particular, they don't want to risk not getting reelected. They probably figure if they help Diebold get the contract, Diebold will help them keep their jobs--it's the bureaucratic "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" philosophy.

Re:Diebold again?

[qtp]

Maybe the states that are still using Diebold machines know something I don't, but I really don't see why you'd want to take such a risk with something as important as voting.

There are a lot of people in the United States that do not really believe in the ability of the "common person" to make valid decisions when it comes to selecting a government. There are others who believe that democracy actually has a negative effect on a society because it counteracts what they believe to be natural selection (ei: the poor will vote for candidates that will "punish the succseful" by asking them to pay taxes in relation to the degree of their success).

These are the same people who would remove qualified scientists from an advisory panel because their findings do not support a particular ideology or business model.

They beleive that their agenda and their agenda alone defines "American Interest", and that to leave such a thing to the whim of the public would be dangerous and foolish.

Of course these are the same guys who backed Saddamm Hussein during the 1980s, and mislead the public about a (non-existant) Al-Qieda/Iraq link and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Re:Diebold again?

[pinkocommie]

After everything we've heard about Diebold in the past few months - thier ties to Bush, uncertified software, etc - does anyone really trust them
Bush? :)

Re:Diebold again?

[sybert]

There are a lot of people in the United States that do not really believe in the ability of the "common person" to make valid decisions when it comes to selecting a government.
Many people would rather have appointed judges and lawbreaking mayors make the law rather then the will of the "common people" who vote. The "common people" have been doing very well lately. They have consistantly voted to reverse tax hikes passed by state legislatures recently and in California the "common people" recalled a governor and elected a new governor with a degree in economics to replace him.

These are the same people who would remove qualified scientists from an advisory panel because their findings do not support a particular ideology or business model.
Exactly. Some people define "respected scientists" as only those who believe in their ideology (like global warming). All scientists who doesn't agree are labeled "industry stooges".

Some people would like to Outsource our military and subvert our "interests" to a corrupt organization of dictators and mostly corrupt elected officials (the U.N.). They would like to suppress any connection they don't want to find and repeat the same lie repeatedly until they think people will believe them. They also suppressed discovery of proliferation activity for political gain (China-gate).

Which way do you thing the activist hackers who would alter evoting dquipment would go?

Solution to the e-voting problem

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Discard all electronic voting machines
2. Use paper ballots
3. Complain about your life, blame everything on the elected official
4. Repeat in four years

This provides identical results at greatly reduced cost and time.

the Netherlands

[ward.deb]

In the Netherland we already do it for years.. What's so new about this?

Re:the Netherlands

[Anonymous Coward]

Wij amerikaners willen niet dat onze verkiezingen "gekocht", "verkocht" en "verneukt" worden zoals die in nederland zijn. Dat de LPF toch zetels krijgt wijzt sterk naar corruptie aan.

Re:the Netherlands

[InfiniteWisdom]

Doing it for 60 times more people spread over 75 times wider area, where about 40% can't read.

Re:the Netherlands

[ward.deb]

Ok. You're right. But how do people who can't read know at who they're voting? :P

Re:the Netherlands

[Anonymous Coward]

Doing it for 60 times more people spread over 75 times wider area, where about 40% can't read.

Ever tried voting while using x ;-)

Re:the Netherlands

[InfiniteWisdom]

Because parties have symbols.

Re:the Netherlands

[dave420]

With about 100 times as many civil servants to keep it going, mind you...

Tell your US Representatives about it

[beforewisdom]

This site has email and other contact information for many US Representatives.

http://www.congress.com/

Its time to embrace this tech

[Ars-Fartsica]

First of all, "real" voting systems are prone to "hacks" too - look at the election of 2000. Ballots are lost, they are fudged, they are counted multiple times...I don't think people have an appreciation for the flaws inherent in the current system, which is also outrageously expensive over the long term.

We need to think carefully about this tech but we also need to embrace it. We already let automation run our reactors, manager all of our money, keep us from running into each other at intersections, etc.

Re:Its time to embrace this tech

[wmspringer]

True, true.

I'd say the difference is that electronic voting has the potential to make vote tampering that much easier and/or harder to track. Especially where there's no paper trail, you really have no choice but to accept whatever number the machine gives you.

Even assuming no fraud (unlikely) the severity of the mistakes varies....a mistake counting paper ballots might result in a small change in the final tally, but a typo in the program could reverse the results of the election.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all in favor of using computers to make things easier. (Otherwise, would I be posting to Slashdot?) But if we're going to move to e-voting, the systems need to have the strongest possible security and reliability...and so far, they don't.

Re:Its time to embrace this tech

[startled]

What I think is odd is that it takes so long for people to arrive at the obvious solutions: optical scan, or electronic voting with a printed record that the voter can review before leaving.

California has gradually come around to that way of thinking, over the protests of everyone responsible for buying an expensive, fraud-inviting, paperless e-voting machine. So now, barring anything unexpected, in 2006 they'll be great.

I guess that's the point of bureacracy-- slow down anything-- but it's still frustrating to see the long, slow process and the numerous small missteps.

Re:Its time to embrace this tech

[Bluesman]

A printed record of your vote is NOT acceptable, and NEVER will be.

This comes up on Slashdot every week. Any record of who you voted for allows fraud and buying of votes.

Imagine a guy standing down the street from the poll location giving people $5 for a record of them voting for candidate A, and you see the problem with the paper verification.

Re:Its time to embrace this tech

[MattT]

You're correct in that walking away with a printed record of your vote is an invitation to abuse (vote selling, intimidation, etc...)
What most people are suggesting is a printed record of your vote, that you can see - and then is kept by the election authorities as a record in case a re-count is needed.

Re:Its time to embrace this tech

[startled]

"A printed record of your vote is NOT acceptable, and NEVER will be. This comes up on Slashdot every week. Any record of who you voted for allows fraud and buying of votes."

I fail to see how that is possible if the voter is not allowed to leave with the record. One good, recent implementation printed the record (which included a voting record, but not the voter's name) behind a glass shield, which the voter could read it through. Once they approved it (or, I'd imagine, after some time out period-- I don't remember all the fine points), it went into a sealed box. So that it, conveniently, served as an auditable paper trail.

I don't see how that's any different from the current optical scan ballot; the record is much more easily human-readable, but it's still just a slip of paper indicating voting preferences that goes into a box.

Then find out how they voted...

[wmspringer]

Going a few links into that site, we find a list of how each person voted on roll call votes at http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/index.asp

(ironically enough, the list is as tallied by the electronic voting machine)

Maybe we should export jobs to india.

[Anonymous Coward]

If the best we can come up with in the US is diebold's tamper proof tape, then perhaps our jobs should go to india.

Come-on, it appears the whole world is doing this e-voting stuff.. let's join the 21st century.

I'm guessing not long

[miu]

"We are working on a model for European countries and also for the US," Mr Simha told the BBC News Online.

I wonder how long it will take this to become politicized as "those Indians are stealing our jobs, now they are trying to teach us how to run a democracy".

Ich bin ein Berliner

[cynical kane]

Die Lederhosen sind zerstorben. Coca-Cola uber alles.

Why don't we have tech-literate judges?

[flossie]

"Without the least doubt, I say the machine is fully tamper-proof," the judge declared.

I'm impressed by the fact that they clearly have technically literate judges in India. As a mere engineer, I would be very hesitant to proclaim an electronic system tamper-proof. Clearly Indian judges are experts in electronics, cryptography and the law. Very impressive.

Re:Why don't we have tech-literate judges?

[Anonymous Coward]

That is what you get when you have lawyers to decide on technical matters. Don't blame us. You got Bush out there doing something similar.

Tamper-proof?? NO SUCH THING!

[Pejorian]

They should know that there's no such thing as "tamper proof" anyway! Only "tamper resistant".

Don't bother testing it, we have to ship it now!

[flossie]

[The technicians] have been told to meet a deadline brought forward by the Election Commission after the poll was called early by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government.

And we all know that bringing the deadline forward to meet changing customer requirements is the best possible way of ensuring that software is bug free ...

Diebold banned?

[ScrewMaster]

Diebold should just be banned, period. My bank used to have a bunch of Diebold ATMs at the drive-through and in the main lobby, but they just replaced them with some much cooler color LCD-based machines from some other vendor. For some reason ... I felt relieved.

Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Judge K Shridhar Rao, in a recent order in connection with an election dispute, ruled that rigging was not possible with the use of EVMs. "Without the least doubt, I say the machine is fully tamper-proof," the judge declared.

Ah yes, well known cybersecurity expert Judge K Shridhar Rao.

Go get me a Slurpy, Shridhar!

Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[shamir_k]

The specs for the Indian EVM. This is definitely going to be the most widely deployed and used e-voting machine in the history of mankind. Seems pretty secure, except for the lack of a paper trail. But with 600 million eligible voters, I guess the lack of a paper trail means a lot of forests have been saved. Besides most attacks against the election system tend to be pretty unsophisticated , ie, boot-capturing and voter initimidation.

Looks like this machine will definitely go a long way in ensuring the fairness of Indian elections. Maybe I'll even vote next time.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[flossie]

I'm not convinced by those specs. They seem like marketing material designed to fool those the technologically illiterate. How is the fact that the software program in "Assembly Language" is fused on a customised micro processor chip" a guarantee that the system is tamper-proof?

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[InfiniteWisdom]

Maybe I'll even vote next time.
Oh very nice attitude. Exactly what we need to ensure good governance. Educated people sitting at home on election day. After all, you can't be bothered to spend 20 minutes going to the polling booth once every 5 years, can you?

Don't bother complaining about the government again. You don't have that right.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[wmspringer]

Well, I guess it keeps people from altering the program after the chip is created. (Unless they switch chips, of course)

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[flossie]

Even if they don't switch chips, what does it mean to fuse assembly code with custom processors? Assembly code has to be converted into machine code before it can be used, so the statement sounds dodgy to start with. Then, you have the problem that if the code is written in assembly language, it is going to be very, very hard for any auditors to check that there is no election rigging going on - have you ever tried reading someone else's assembly code?

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[wmspringer]

You're right, it does sounds like technobabble.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[shamir_k]

For me, it would be more like 26 hours by flight, since I am currently in Washington DC. Thats not counting the 2-3 hour long queues outside most polling stations in Bangalore.

But considering the security these Deibold machines seem to have, maybe I can vote in DC in November! :-D

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[rsidd]

Even if they don't switch chips, what does it mean to fuse assembly code with custom processors? Assembly code has to be converted into machine code before it can be used

Assembly to machine code is a direct translation, i.e. assembly code is every bit as efficient as machine code, not like compiling. Nobody writes in ones and zeros.

Then, you have the problem that if the code is written in assembly language, it is going to be very, very hard for any auditors to check that there is no election rigging going on

These machines have been used since the 1980s. Rather hard to customise them to rig an election that won't take place for a decade.

Two more articles on their specs and why they're tamper proof.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[wfberg]

Seems pretty secure

You gleaned that from the "100% tamper proof" specification I guess?

I'd have to guess, because there is no way to know for sure.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[Kaki Nix Sain]

have you ever tried reading someone else's assembly code?

I can just barely make sense of my own a few hours after I write it.

Personally, I try for absurd levels of overdocumentation as I go. That, and subroutines that have small, clear goals that can be read off from their names.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[smishra]

I did write a couple of small programs in 1s and 0s . It is not too difficult especially for small programs.

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[MHleads]

Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote.
--George Jean Nathan

Re:Technical specifications for Indian EVM

[InfiniteWisdom]

Thank you! I'll add that to my box of clever quotes to use at apt moments :)

So how SHOULD e-voting machines be built?

[wmspringer]

Everyone here has an opinion on e-voting, so...

What is the most reliable method for voting? Paper ballots with lines drawn on them? Open source voting software? If you were in charge of developing the voting techniques for the next election, what would you do?

Re:So how SHOULD e-voting machines be built?

[qigong]

Before diving in to what kind of design we should be using, I think some time needs to be spend deciding the design parameters. The solution should probably:

1. Be auditable.
2. Be easily testable.
3. Be anonymous (with respect to individual votes).
4. Be intuitive to use.
5. Be fair.

The Nevada Gaming Board has been cited as a good example of the kind of extremely paranoid testing and auditing that needs to go into a system this important. However, for a voting system we've added some new and challenging criteria- anonymity, ease of use, and fairness. None of these individually are difficult, but when combined with the testabilty and auditability become particularly challenging. How do you ensure that individual votes are getting properly registered while still maintaining the anonymity of the votes?

Personally, I don't see how all of these criteria can be met in a "remote" (e.g. web) voting system. However, I think these problems are all solvable with our current technology, if we are careful. In fact, I think that if a system were designed carefully, we could even come up with a system where we can, if necessary, confirm (validate) a region or even nation's voting results by storing individual voting results on voter-owned smart cards.

Assume we set up a system where every voter is issued a voting smart card that they retain possession over. When you go in to vote you stick your smart card in the voting machine. You then vote, and it records your choices on the card. Audits could then take place after an election by having randomly selected voters come in and stick their smart cards into a seperate vote validation system that retallies the results and allows voters to confirm their vote selection. Using statistics, you can set a threshold for when the error level is too suspiciously high, and require revotes in the regions with anomalous results. By using different vendors to provide the voting machines, smart cards, and vote auditing system, you can greatly increase your assurance that no entity has tampered with the voting results. Apart from the influences of the media... and politicians... and education system... and religions.....

On second thought, forget the whole thing. :)

Re:So how SHOULD e-voting machines be built?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ha ha. No one bit on your karma-whoring question. Better luck next time.

Re:So how SHOULD e-voting machines be built?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you have to practice to be that stupid, or did it come naturally?

This doesn't solve the real problem:

[phoenix321]

Gerrymandering? (More on this via google)

Re:This doesn't solve the real problem:

[aukaru]

Yes, in Maryland you get the best of everything. You get the Diebold 'AccuVote-TS' system AND gerrymandering (I think the 3rd district is my favorite).

Re:This doesn't solve the real problem:

[N3Bruce]

The 2nd and the 4th are pretty good as well. I live in the 6th, a Republican Ghetto. We also had quite an interesting Governor's race a few years back in 94, where it seemed the dead came back to life and voted for our former governor Glendenning in huge numbers from a precinct that reported in 3 hours late.

Re:This doesn't solve the real problem:

[cyphergirl]

Holy cow (Dist 3)! That's riddiculous. Someone needs to author a bill mandating that "districts" must be made up of whole counties. Forget this redistricting crap.

old news

[Ubi_NL]

Meanwhile, the Netherlands has had electronic voting for over 10 years now
Details here

Re:old news

[jumpingfred]

I was listening to NPR about this. The had some comments from a sale guy from the Netherlands saying that he did not know what all the fuss was about a paper trail. The machines in the Netherlands did not have a paper trail and every body was OK with that.

I almost was a tech for those

[st0rmshad0w]

Recently the election board or whoever was in charge of all that had at least one operatiopn recruiting tech people to get these things in shape and deployed. I wouldn't touch it with someone elses ten foot pole. Their whole opration seemed to be on a very last minute frame of mind. They were using timelines that gave only a few days from date of hire (date of job posting actually) to setting up machines in the field. I got no indication that any sort of security checks were being done on these people, and while I'm not a fan of adding more security clearance required jobs, should just any shmoe be able to get one of these jobs without being checked out? Seems fairly untrustworthy to me, and from my perspective, I would not want to be the one who signed off on a machine where something went squirrely.

And whats so difficult about having a printed voter verifiable receipt anyway?

India, Maryland?

[bitflip]

Oh, I thought all those jobs were going out of the country, or something. I guess I'll move to Maryland for a job.

Why didn't someone tell me?

Ban Diebold

[handy_vandal]

... whether Diebold should be banned in California after using uncertified software in last October's election.

Diebold should be banned: everywhere, period.

-kgj

India is a town in Maryland?

[aat]

India is a town in Maryland? I never knew that....

Or maybe the headline was supposed to have been
Evoting in India and Maryland

Re:India is a town in Maryland?

[Anonymous Coward]

You will be surprised to see this, this and this.

I'll tell you what's different! Re:the Netherlands

[Sam Nitzberg]

You have Nicholas Wirth AND Vietse Venema !

http://www.iamsam.com

Voting machines in Maryland

[jfengel]

I was in a Maryland high school the other day, and there was a pile of black containers labeled "Diebold" addressed to the voting board, sitting unattended in the cafeteria.

Each case was held closed by a wire lockout, available only to those elite groups who receive electrical supply catalogs.

I of course chose not to mess with them. Any come-from-behind victory I make on Tuesday will be purely coincidental.

yawn.

[Anonymous Coward]

Taco, this is getting boring.

Why don't you put up a post reminding people to vote in the March 3rd primaries and suggest some issues to debate?

Interested in setting up a panel in NYC (July)

[Sam Nitzberg]

I am interested in setting up a panel in NYC (New York, New York, USA) somewhere between July 9 and July 11.

Some topics that color my view of e-voting systems briefly follow :

My concern is that any system be appropriately thought out, formally and precisely defined, using rigidly designed systems (not necessarily off-the-shelf), made to precisely and verifiably conduct voting tansactions, without being able to disclose, leak, or bleed any information that is not supposed to escape the system.

The Johns Hopkins study is an excellent reference and resource on the issues that have to be addressed.

I am personally interested in setting up a panel in New York in Mid-July (not much - just about an hour to an hour and-a-half), but at an interesting venue. I am not offering funding, but there could be some visibility.

I would welcome hearing from anyone who is doing interesting work in this area - in the US or overseas, that would be interested in participating on such a panel, to include related topics on technology-and-democracy.

Thank you,

Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com

I'll tell you how it goes on tuesday

[Facekhan]

I will be voting in the primary in Maryland. Well Actually I will only be voting for school board cause I am not a registered republicrat. I am very curious to see whether this touch screen crap is gonna work or not.

As in shrinkwrap?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the ticket. If it is 'sealed' as in shrink wrapped, as in Windows, it must be safe, reliable, and trustworthy. Nevermind whats on the inside.

Arguments Against E-Voting Other Than Security

[ltsmash]

I don't think online voting is a good idea, not necessary for security reasons but for political reasons. If voting is as easy as "pointing and clicking", we are going to get a lot more votes from people who have done little to nothing to follow the election. If someone is willing to register to vote and then take time from their busy day to actually vote, it's much more likely that they've at least studied a little about the candidates; e.g. they aren't just randomly at their computer clicking on a "Vote Now!" link.

Re:Arguments Against E-Voting Other Than Security

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't vote from their personal computers, they go to special terminals, just like in a paper election.

physical insecurity of voting terminals

[rakerman]

In Physical security of electronic voting terminals Tobin Fricke says "A cart of Diebold electronic voting machines was delivered today to the common room of this Berkeley, CA boarding house, which will be a polling place on Tuesday's primary election. The machines are on a cart which is wrapped in plastic wrap (the same as the stuff we use in the kitchen). A few cable locks (bicycle locks, it seems) provide the appearance of physical security, but they aren't threaded through each machine."

See my site on the issue in Canada, including international reports: Paper Vote Canada.

verifiedvoting.org

[Karl-Friedrich Lenz]

Everyone interested in this issue should take a look at the VerifiedVoting Website.

Electronic voting needs to solve two problems: Guarantee that every vote is counted exactly and guarantee that everyone can trust that result.

As Schneier points out, there can be no trust without a paper trail for verification. So it is quite important to support legislation mandating such a paper trail.

This is NOT a technical problem

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a motivation issue.

The problem is that everyone in the system has incentives to distort the vote some way. You should evaluate any proposed technology by how much easier or harder it makes miscounting the vote.

Electronic voting. Lemme see. No paper trail. Software that nobody audited. Internal data and communication that nobody admits to having access to. Does that sound easier or harder to get away with shenanigans with than paper voting?

The other things that you mention all have the huge advantage that the people who build the system aren't expected to have huge financial incentives (ie bribes) for messing up. Except for finance, where (in the USA at least) a legal system that makes any doubtful outcome be ruled in the customer's favour makes banks be very concerned about getting things right.

Unless you know what problem technology is supposed to solve for you, you can't hope to evaluate whether technology will have a chance of solving it. Electronic voting doesn't have a hope in hell of improving visibility and accountability in the system.

Make Room for Maryland, Red Green!

[annielaurie]

Although the Baltimore Sun, our local oracle, is strangely silent on the voting-systems aspect of the primary, the Maryland Board of Elections is not. They've developed a special website to inform the citizenry of how "Easy...Accurate...Secure" the new voting system will be.

Peruse the training film (wmd only), download a registration form, see a sample screen. Above all, don't miss the FAQ. My nomination for Best FAQ is:
Q: How do I know the system will work properly on Election Day?
A: Each piece of equipment is prepared for the election by election staff and a public test is held to verify this process. Before this process and after the public test is completed, all equipment is sealed and secured until being opened by a bi-partisan team of election judges in the polling location on Election Day.

In addition to the Website, we've been favored by bus posters, billboards, and even a few commercials on local cable.

I am oh, so pleased to see even more of my tax money being squandered on these systems--this time just to tell me how wonderful they will be. I'm going to vote when the polls open Tuesday (it is a Democratic and Republican primary here), then leave immediately for a trip. I feel sure other Maryland Slashdot readers will have volumes to say about the experience.

Anne

Re:Make Room for Maryland, Red Green!

[jez9999]

Peruse the training film (wmd only)

What does the training of voters have to do with weapons of mass destruction? ;-)

Why is the vote of the illerterate that important?

[NotQuiteReal]

Face it, if the illerterate masses are not read up on the issues they are voting on. How can they even know what they are voting on?

If it is a vote for an elected official, at least one can judge on what that person has said to them - via personal, radio, and TV appearences. Not perfect, but something.

What about other issues? What does an illertarte really know? At least the literate can read the text of a ballot measure [not that many do].

In the end, what is the value of an uninformed vote?

If radio/TV ads are as deceptive in high-illeteracey democracies such as India, as they are here in the US - it the perfect argument against illiterate voters.

I don't have an answer, most alternatives are also wrong. Just a question...

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[Gyan]

In the end, what is the value of an uninformed vote?

George W. Bush will be happy to tell you.

fuck no

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure of that??? I've read interviews where he claims to be Catholic. What on earth would make you think that?

Re:fuck no

[o0zi]

Am I the only one who saw the title and thought "India's not in Maryland!"? Suppose so...

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[rsidd]

Face it, if the illerterate masses are not read up on the issues they are voting on. How can they even know what they are voting on?

It's a parliamentary system. Voters don't vote for the George W. Bush equivalent. They vote for their local Member of Parliament, who could be a member of a political party (usually is), or an independent. They usually do that vote based on how that MP's been performing (he/she's supposed to take care of that constituency) and they know that very well. And at the end of the day, the party with a majority support in the lower house of parliament gets to govern. It works.

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[berkeleyjunk]

It is because all people are equal. Cliche aside these people cannot read but they CAN SEE AND LISTEN. They go to meetings, candidates come by to see them and tell them what he/she would do if he/she was elected. They know what a party did when it was in government ...

Cheers
Junk

It's the Same, Only Different

[Kurt Wall]

Interesting article, and I'm not surprised that electronic voting raises as many issues in India as it does in the United States, albeit that some of the issues are different.

My favorite quote, though, was:

"Some of them were thrilled to punch the machines. I have seen so many happy villagers."

I don't know about you, but it's not the voting machines I usually want to punch -- it's the dratted politicians.

Maryland verified voting website

[plsuh]

The Campaign for Verified Voting in Maryland has a website at www.truevotemd.org. If you're a Maryland voter or just want to show your support, go there and sign up. If you're going to vote on Tuesday in Maryland's primary, we're organizing a protest to demand paper ballots.

The problem in Maryland is that the officials at the State Board of Elections are in Diebold's pocket. Realize that San Diego and other California counties are getting voter-verified paper trail equipment from Diebold for free, despite paying only 60% as much for the machines as Maryland. Maryland also bought a much larger order. However, since the SBE officials won't go to bat Diebold is trying to charge big bucks for the VVPT. Diebold is also spending heavily in lobbying and contributing to the Maryland Delegates and State Senators who could pass legislation that would force a VVPT.

Some other good sites if you're interested in this topic:

www.verifiedvoting.org
www.blackboxvoting.org

--Paul

Re:Maryland verified voting website

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, what I've heard is that the state board of elections wants to dump Diebold. Also, Diebold is working hard to get the administrator of the SBE fired. The SBE realizes that this Diebold stuff is crap, but they are stuck with it for the primary.

Both Diebold and the Md SBE are pointing fingers trying to make the other look bad at this point.

Thanks...

[NotQuiteReal]

I metioned that in my post, but this is slashdot - so I assume only do you not need to RTFA, but you don't even need to RTFP :-)

Anyhow, yes, I agree, if you are voting for your representative anyone bothering to vote has as good a chance as anyone else of "getting it right".

Evoting in India, Maryland

[No. 24601]

So.. what.. we're outsourcing to India so much so that they're now a State?

unit judge say what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in maryland and i'm a unit judge for the election, unless the tape is something they've added in the last week it's not a state wide thing

Re:unit judge say what?

[Anonymous Coward]

also, the diebold rep I talked to was insultingly glib when questioned (reasonably so) about the security of the machines and the politics of diebold. it'll be interesting to see how all this pans out, me being one of those bipartisan election judges.

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[ggvaidya]

What does an illertarte really know?

That he can't spell 'illiterate'?

Well, ideally, the system works because the politician comes down to the constituency and tells the people what his party believes in, what they hope to achieve, and the voting public ('illertarte masses'?) develop an opinion on the guy and his policies, and choose the best one.

In reality, though, everything from armed goons taking over entire election stations to people buying votes goes. Then again, it could be - and has been - argued that democracy is a terrible system, but it is the best of the worse.

EVM In India

[venkats]

India has been using the EVMs for about 7 years now. only that this time around, the number of machines deployed is going to be significantly higher than in previous years...
also, since the elections are held in multiple phases across the country, the machines get re-used.

Thanks...

[NotQuiteReal]

Sorry for the typo. I metioned the election of individuals in my post, but this is slashdot - so I assume only do you not need to RTFA, but you don't even need to RTFP :-)

I agree - democracy is the best of the lot, but how can we improve it, in practicality?

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[Anonymous Coward]

The argument against illiterate votes creates one insolvable problem -- the voting will soon become of the literate, by the literate and for the literate.... By segregating any large section one will only end up with increasing fissures. Expecting the literate voter to take into account of illiterate voter's needs is expecting too much. Too often the view of the literate elite on what is good for the poor is vastly different from what the poor really seem to ask for... Many elections have been won and lost on potable water; but for someone sitting in a city it looks too trivial a reason to decide the vote; but the reality is that the poor will vote on what matters them most; and in effect a democracy will force the elceted to take that into cognisance.

They tried this in Quebec

[Prof. Pi]

With the elections being as close as they have been, shutting down machines in a few heavily [democratic|republican] districts could easily change the results of the election.

Quebec (Canada) tried this in their 1995 referendum on trying to secede from Canada. Ballots were marked by hand and counted by hand. Each ballot had large circles labeled YES and NO. Only certain symbols were allowed (IIRC, they were an X, a check mark, a straight horizontal line, or filling in the circle completely). Anything else was to be considered "spoiled" (historically, an average of about 1% of ballots are spoiled, often by voters protesting what they see as a poor choice of candidates).

Some election officer took it upon himself to issue written instructions to his counters requiring them to be extremely picky in validating the symbols. For instance, if the check mark were drawn like a V (both strokes the same length), it was to be counted as spoiled. All the districts where he sent the instructions were ones which could be predicted to tilt toward the NO side. In some districts, as many as 12% of the ballots were disqualified.

According to a guy I knew who was an observer (parties get to have observers present at the counting), some counting rooms almost erupted into fistfights when observers loudly objected to the disqualifying of so many ballots.

The referendum lost, but only by a margin which was less than the estimated number of NO votes lost in this manner. (Not that that means anything, except to show how close things were.) The secessionist Quebec government "investigated," decided nothing was wrong, and spent most of their energies trying to sue a student group in Ontario for "illegally subsidizing" the NO campaign by bussing students to a pro-Canada rally in Montreal.

Uh, yeah?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is how it happens.
1) Dodgy looking guy walks in to polling booth. Breaks tamper-proof tape.
2) Next voter walks in, tells voting official that the tape is broken (as they have been told to check)
3) Dodgy guy chased by angry libertarians and greens eager to vote for a candidate with no chance of winning.
$) Cops catch up, guy gos to court, is convicted, sentenced to pay massive fine and 10 years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Our Party requirements for a secure e-vote

[Quizo69]

Here is our Party Constitution's wording on what would constitute a valid vote. Currently we do not have such a process in place (we've only just begun operating), and from talking to various people on the issue, it appears that most experts regard this as impossible to implement. I'd like to think that eventually someone will create such a system, as it would open the world's democracies up to far more representation than they currently enjoy.

Online Voting Security

3.51 For online voting to be considered secure, it needs to be open to outside scrutiny and have at its heart the ability to verify that only an authorised Member has cast a vote in the proper manner.

3.52 An online vote must fulfil the following criteria to be considered valid:

a. The Member must be able to cast their vote such that only they know how they voted;

b. The Member must be able to verify that their vote has been correctly registered, both at the time of casting the vote and at any other time after the event;

c. The Member must only be able to vote once per issue;

d. The vote must be correctly registered at the server;

e. The server must be able to prove it has not been tampered with;

f. The server's hardware and software must be open to scrutiny at any time and independently verifiable by a third party;

g. The server must be able to check the authority of a Member to cast a vote, but not retain specific identifiable information on how a Member voted after the event without that Member providing a hash key for verification purposes.

3.53 In the event that an online vote is questioned as to its validity and integrity, there must be a way to conduct a recount for up to one month after the vote.

You can download a full copy of our Constitution by visiting the URL in my sig, and learn more about what we stand for if interested.

Re:Jim Caviezel, plays Christ, is Jewish

[Sivaram_Velauthapill]

Jim is Catholic. I know because he is the lead in my favourite movie of all time: The Thin Red Line.

Sivaram Velauthapillai

Re:The Passion : A review

[Sivaram_Velauthapill]

I haven't seen the movie but from what I read, it really wouldn't appeal to anyone unless they were Christian (I'm an athiest BTW). Rumour has it that Mel is thinking of making more Christian movies (due to this success) so maybe his future films will explain things better.

As far as anti-Semitism is concerned, I'm not going to go there.

Sivaram Velauthapillai

Re:Why is the vote of the illerterate that importa

[Sivaram_Velauthapill]

Democracies treat everyone as equals. Anything that deviates from it will be an elitist system.

Whether people are illiterate or not doesn't make THAT much difference. MAny people in USA and Canada don't bother reading anything anyway. A politician's speech or television advertising probably has a greater impact than anything they read.

Sivaram Velauthapillai

Landmark proposal

[MHleads]

Election Commission of India is proposing Vote for nobody in this election.

Any idea how many democracies in the world give this option to the voters?

Going Postal in UK

[soundman32]

In the my area of the UK (manchester), our local & European elections this June are being trialed by postal vote.

It doesn't matter much if you have electronic or pencil voting if the electorate can't be bothered to actually go to the voting booth.

Maybe postal will get more voters to vote?

Isulating computers

[ooby]

Does anyone else have doubts about the operability of computer wrapped in tape? I wonder if these guys know how warm machines can get.

Not Exactly.

[Irvu]

The 2000 Election was also the first presidential election in which Diebold machines were used. Florida's Velousa (sp?) County. When the initial results came in they were devastating -16,022 (yes that's a negative number) votes were cast for Al Gore. This massive deficit caused Gore to appear diasterously behind Bush in the polls. It was at this point in the night that Gore gave his first resignation speech.

Later on the "official" counts were reset and a (more belivable) set of (nonnegative) numbers came in from the county in question. Gore then retracted his resignation. However that resignation came back to haunt him during the court case because Kathrine Harris used it to argue that he had already qut the reace and wasn't entitled to a recount.

Notreably, the recounts took place in other counties as Velousa county's machines did not produce paper records and could not be verified.

See Bev Harris's Site Blackboxvoting.org for details. See here for data on Volusia county. See here for internal Diebold memos discussing the -16,022 problem, and see here for more general info on the 2000 election.

Try reading the articles.

[Behrooz]

My assertions? If you'll look closely, I didn't make any. Apparently, you're unable to RTFA, so I'll have to summarize:

The articles I posted provide information which supports my point of view. From these sources, I personally conclude that there were electoral irregularities.

Perhaps you feel that having thousands of eligible voters removed from the voting rosters without notification or appeal is an everyday feature of American politics that we should not be concerned about. Or at least, that we should not be concerned about it if the voters who are disenfranchised are mostly minority, mostly lower-income, and share a name with a list of known felons.

Which of us is wearing the tinfoil hat, exactly? Dumbass...