Slashdot Mirror


Finnish Court Dismisses E-Voting Result

wizzor writes in with a follow-up on the Finnish municipal election in which 2% of the votes were lost by a defective e-voting system, and which the Helsinki Administrative Court had found acceptable. Now the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland has rejected the election results (original in Finnish; bad Google translation here) and ordered the election to be re-run. The submitter adds, "Apparently 98% of the votes isn't enough to determine how the remaining 2% voted, after all."

15 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. 2% were lost... by Mishotaki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If 2% of the votes were lost, how many were incorrect or not registered properly? If the system can lose votes, it can very easily put them for the wrong person as well...

    1. Re:2% were lost... by gringofrijolero · · Score: 4, Funny

      Depends how well they were "calibrated"...

      --
      Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
    2. Re:2% were lost... by caliburngreywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the USA, there is often a dramatic difference between early morning voters (usually elderly or thos who work in schools) Mid-day voters (usually unemployed or work non-standard hours) and evening voters (usually work a regular day job) if the 2% was spread out evenly over space and time, representing a random sample, inference is acceptable, but if it represents, let's say, the several thousand factory workers who voted right after work in a district that is abuzz with fervor for a new labor-friendly candidate...yeah, you can't base that 2% of the other 98%

  2. how many coffin nails will it take? by mtrachtenberg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    E-voting has had more lives than a cat. It should be over, done, kaput. An experiment that failed.

  3. Re:What was the margin of victory? by Quothz · · Score: 4, Informative

    If the margin of victory was greater then 2 percent,

    It was not, as best as I can tell from the translation:

    Kauniainen municipality electronically of the votes lost to two percent, and for missing votes in the number would have been enough change in the outcome of the elections.

  4. Re:What was the margin of victory? by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In theory, because of the voting system used, 2% of the votes could have dramatic consequences. Of course, we'll never know because the votes are anonymous and the recipients secret, but if you think that quite a lot of candidates got in with just a few dozen of votes, you can clearly see how 2% could have determined a lot.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  5. Banking doesn't usually require anonymity by Chmcginn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem with the electronic voting vs. banking comparison is that bank account have your personal information all over them. Votes, however, do not. If you gave up secret voting, you could likely make a 'secure enough' voting system, since anyone could check their own vote in the system.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
    1. Re:Banking doesn't usually require anonymity by Sheafification · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you gave up secret voting, you could likely make a 'secure enough' voting system, since anyone could check their own vote in the system.

      There's no need to give up on secret voting to get this. Thanks to advances in cryptography we can have secret *and* verifiable ballots. An example implementation can be found at Helios voting. Also, check out a description of a paper based system: Scratch and Vote [PDF]

    2. Re:Banking doesn't usually require anonymity by GvG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You could be forced by a third party to reveal how you voted (they would force you to give them your random characters and then they would be able to verify that you voted as you were told to.)

  6. A bold prediction by hyades1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I bet Diebold, or Premier, or whatever it is that pack of cheats and liars are calling themselves these days, won't be trying to place their voting machines in Finland any time soon. I doubt they could attain 98% accuracy even with only one candidate on the ballot.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  7. Most still voted with traditional methods by sakari · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just to clarify on this, most still voted with the traditional pen & paper methods. I guess E-voting was tested in some places. The finnish E-voting system was programmed by TietoEnator, which has had some questionable results in the past too in delivering working software. Still they get a lot of the government related jobs .. gee, wonder why ?

  8. From EFFI by Razalhague · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's an article in non-google-translated English. Also contains some other links in English.

  9. More Info in English by pookie13 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually the machines were supplied by local company called Tieto.

    More about the case in English
    Yle News
    Helsingin Sanomat
    Newsroom Finland

  10. News in English by kaip · · Score: 4, Informative
    Some news in English about the court decision:

    Finnish e-voting results annulled, municipalities to hold new elections by Electronic Frontier Finland ry (Effi), the best summary in English, IMO;
    Helsingin Sanomat;
    Helsinki Times;
    The Brad Blog;
    NewsRoom Finland;
    YLE; and
    Turre (the lawyers that won the case).

    The voting system was provided by Tieto and Scytl. In their News Page, Scytl declares: "Scytl's Pnyx.core successfully used in local elections in Finland" Shouldn't they update this...? It is even possible that the 2% of the votes lost was due to the Pnyx.core, instead of usability issues with the voting terminals, as has been commonly assumed - who knows.

  11. Interesting facts about the case by jaria · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is of course a completely correct decision from the supreme court to re-run the elections, and we are very happy about it.

    But it has been interesting to follow the developments and the various attempts to avoid this outcome.

    Before the elections, the minister of justice, Tuija Brax claimed any possible problems were "science fiction". After the elections and when the problems were announced, she has not been a support of new elections, just stating that the courts need to decide. However, she was quick to launch an internal investigation and fire the Director of Elections. Not sure the director was really the true guilty person here, but at least a scapegoat had been found...

    The city voting boards very resisting new elections for the last second. They came up with interesting claims to prevent this from happening. One claim that we've heard often -- even after the decision -- is that the new elections do not matter, because the party situations would not change. Well, they were missing the minor issue that in Finland the election system is based on voting on persons, not parties. Some of us do care about who we vote there. A more sinister claim was that the voters had conspired to misuse the voting system on purpose, to show that it was unreliable (!). Now, talk about science fiction, maybe these guys could be of some use in the JFK murder investigation? Not to mention the fact that a correctly implemented voting system should not be vulnerable to such misuse.

    The three cities involved are now extremely unhappy with the ministry, as the law requires them to pay for the new elections. The ministry has promised an extra budget to help out... though in my mind, the architects and vendors of the system should get to pay.

    Its also been extremely difficult to get any information from the government on the details of the system. The local EFF wanted to take a look before the elections, but was refused (or impossible NDAs were requested). I made an official request to get the cost information of the entire project, and the government claimed that they have no such information. One number that has been circulated in the press was 700 000 euros, but that seems low, given that a large number of design and specification work went in, even at the ministry level not to mention the vendors.

    All in all, a happy outcome:

    - director of elections fired
    - minister is now pro-open source and paper trail
    - general knowledge of possible problems in e-voting was increased in the country :-)
    - elections are re-run

    However, everyone is quite focused on the specific bugs we experienced, thinking that individual bugs can easily be fixed. I'm more worried about the process and the way that these things are done. I don't see a way to avoid bugs next time either, for instance. Lack of verifiability, openness, government not listening to citizens or outside experts, blind acceptance of vendor sales pitches, lack of sensible motivation for the entire effort are the worrisome aspects.