Slashdot Mirror
Linux-Based E-Voting In Brazil
John Sokol writes "I just heard from a good friend and Linux kernel hacker in Brazil that they have just finished their municipal election with 128 million people using Linux to vote. They voted nationwide for something like 5,000 city mayors. Voting is mandatory in Brazil. The embedded computer they are using once ran VirtuOS (a variant of MS-DOS); it now has its own locally developed, Linux-based distro. These are much nicer, smaller, and cheaper than the systems being deployed here in the US. Here is a Java-required site with a simulated Brazilian voting system. It's very cool; they even show you a picture of the candidate you voted for."
It's very cool; they even show you a picture of the candidate you voted for.
Wow! Incredible! I never thought something like that would be possible with a computer!
Is like this.
Oh well, I'm sorry that you Americans will have to put up with your Diebold chosen masters in the next election... hope it doesn't turn out too bad for you.
From the wiki:
In 2004, Diebold-Procomp decided to migrate to Linux as a cost reduction measure.
I don't see any of the problems resolved.
You can still tamper with the system and there is no verifiable audit.
I don't know that the underlying choice of OS was biggest problem (if I were building it, sure I'd choose Linux) - there are more fundamental process issues that are at fault. Namely, that someone could tamper with the election and no one could (dis)prove it.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
We have web based banking. Why not web based voting?
If anyone thinks I care more about who I vote for than the money in my bank accounts (and my liability for debt) they're disillusional. The politicians are all just different monkeys screeching different things that suit them. In the last election I voted for (mandatory council elections) I didn't know or care about the candidates who'd only shown their faces 2 weeks beforehand. On the ballot I wrote "Fuck them liars all. This form of democrasy a joke". Am I the only one that thinks it's hilarious that we can bank online but not vote online?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
This is great
I do really miss a paper trail, that is needed in case there are doubts of "fraud", we do not want such doubts, do we ?
Crappy software running on linux is just as easy to rig...
the problem with Diebold is political not technical
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
How un-American. Oh wait...
I believe it is of interest due to the US election coming up soon, the use of voting machines with closed source on those machines and the tampering discussion.
Now, of course you could modify a linux machine as well, but with a potential army of hackers the security risks are handled much like the security in Linux: Assuming that for every one hacker that is malicious there is usually one or at least two that spot a problem and bring it to light.
Sorry, but mostly machines are built by Diebold who bought Procomp in Brazil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions
http://www.samurai.com.br/urnaeletronica/ue2004/view
say CP/M still controlling a nuclear reactor , now THAT would be interesting.
Why... It is probably more common then you think. In the US Nuclear Plants are aging and the Liberal Hippies will not fund to keep them up to date, as Nuclear is Bad OK. It is actually quite common to see old computers running Nuclear systems. As they have work for decades and there is no reason to risk a new system that may have problems.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Open sourcing the software changes nothing to the fact that it is impossible to check how the votes are tallied. It just takes two bytes change in the binary to reverse the results of an election. In a world where the task of counting votes can be done by a machine small enough to fit into a smart card, you'll never be sure that the code published is the code running if you don't want to trust the officials organizing the vote.
This is a step back from paper ballots.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Now where is the link to the source code and how can I verify that it is the code that was really running on the machines?
As a matter of fact, contrary to what Wikipedia says, the source code *is* available. The Ministério PÃblico (something like the public prosecutor in US), the OAB - Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, an organ that congregates all lawyers in the country and any of the political parties can have access not only to the source code but to the compilation, digital signing and installation process. They also can run simulations and test the system for security and fraud and request any ballot to be audited. The whole software and data is also available for 2 years after the election. During the election days, representatives of any party can stay at any polling station to be sure that the election is not being rigged in this point. Personally, I think our system is quite secure and would require a major conspiracy involving basically everyone.
Scientia est Potentia
You can vote blank or null vote with that machine. That's good, but I really
want to write %#%@%$!! in the ballot sometimes.
Wrong, much harder than paper based.
Tampering the elections on a paper based election was really the rule here in small cities. That's pretty easy. One VERY simple method used carbon paper so that the vote for each one would be copied and could be delivered to the candidate as "proof of voting" to retrieve some bucks from him.
Another problem recurrent here in the times of paper: illiterate people vote here. When they had to write down the name of the candidate, it was a nightmare to decipher the vote. It is pretty easy for them to copy some numbers, and they can verify the vote with the pic.
Looking at this here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Brazil
About half way down it lists the result of the 2006 election : couple of points on that:
(1) There are a lot of parties (~30)
(2) They have low overall control within the parliament (15% max)
(3) The socialists are on top
E-voting or no, if the socialists were to rig the election (a) it would be obvious that they did it, (b) they would have to go all out to make any kind of difference, (c) they are unlikely to have the corporate influence necessary to pull it off and (d) there isn't much you get for it.
In the US, on the other hand, there is effectively two parties each with ca. 50% of the electorate each, so rigging the election is (a) worthwhile and (b) easy to get away with. On top of that the Republicans are very good friends with the people that make the machines, and finally, you get to be 'leader of the free world' and all your buddies get rich.
Means, motive and opportunity - right there. The interface is the least of their worries.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
First, mobile phone cameras, or any other, were forbidden in the ballot - though from my experience this was only enforced in areas where there were a reasonable possibility of people selling votes or being coerced to vote, such as in Rio de Janeiro.
Second, no one said the process was unhackable. It is just much harder to hack than a paper and pen election. It is auditable by anyone with sufficient technical expertise, and that is good enough for mosrt people who care.
And finally, shut up and at least do some research on it before calling others idiots. The voter types a fucking NUMBER, not the candidate's name. A picture appears so even people who can't read can check if they are voting right (I concede tha some elder people do take quite a long time to vote).
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
I work at the polls here in Virginia, and we have an electronic voting machine. Here's my review of the Brazilian device compared to ours:
In any event, I think SL geeks are obvious choices to volunteer to be Officers of Election. We know the vulnerabilities of the technology, and have the necessary attention to detail to appreciate the kinds of auditing checks that need to be done to run a fair and open election.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
All the IP is owned by the Brazilian Government. Diebold is just the assembler with the lowest price.
Not that it makes the machine secure, it is just slightly better than the US situation.
Rethinking email
Some people who work during the elections are volunteers. while others are drafted by the Superior Electoral Tribunal. You can still not go there and do your job as long as you have a strong justification (like not being in the city you vote on the day of election). There is no voting 'in transit' i.e. voting in another city, or in any other 'electoral college' besides your own.
As a compensation, you get a 'lunch ticket' and a letter which entitles you a 1-day off so you can compensate your day working on the Sunday election (just give the letter to your employer, he cannot refuse you the day off, it's part of the electoral law)
By 5:00 PM, no one else can vote. If there is a line, people are given numbers ad only those with numbers in line can cast their votes.
once the last voters finish, the voting system is set to 'closed', meaning no more votes can be computed. at least three paper trails are generated, for three of the people in charge of the voting table. Any one can go there and ask for an extra paper trail, such as me and you. usually, a few people ask for additional paper trails on behalf of their own parties. You can check the paper trail gainst the voters registered for that college, to see if there are any irregularities.
Potentially, a parallel vote counting can be set up, completely contolled by the population, just using the paper trails generated at the end of the election.
The president of the table then takes the machine to the Electoral Tribunal and there they pick up the internal data and do the vote counting.
IMO it's reasonably resistent to tampering, and allow for parallel counting, which makes it resistent to frauds. Yeah, being open source would help for sure, and setting up a country-wide parallel vote counting would be very hard, but it is possible.
I believe the U.S. should just license our technology and be happy with it ;-)
Some patients of mine work with the elections in Brazil. Being a slashdot guy for a while I am always asking them questions about the voting system. What I have learned: # the code is available in advance for the parties OPEN SOURCE (only not online) # the software/firmware is loaded on the machines in front of the parties # the machine has no open slots for the outside world # it is sealed tamper free with a special seal that solf destroys once openned. # the is a hash code to ensure the validity of the files # only the vote is recorded, there is no way on knowing who voted on who. # the order of the votes on the files is radomly changed every new vote cheers,