Slashdot Mirror
DARPA Is Building a $10 Million, Open Source, Secure Voting System (vice.com)
samleecole writes: For years security professionals and election integrity activists have been pushing voting machine vendors to build more secure and verifiable election systems, so voters and candidates can be assured election outcomes haven't been manipulated. Now they might finally get this thanks to a new $10 million contract the Defense Department's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has launched to design and build a secure voting system that it hopes will be impervious to hacking.
The first-of-its-kind system will be designed by an Oregon-based firm called Galois, a longtime government contractor with experience in designing secure and verifiable systems. The system will use fully open source voting software, instead of the closed, proprietary software currently used in the vast majority of voting machines, which no one outside of voting machine testing labs can examine. More importantly, it will be built on secure open source hardware, made from special secure designs and techniques developed over the last year as part of a special program at DARPA. The voting system will also be designed to create fully verifiable and transparent results so that voters don't have to blindly trust that the machines and election officials delivered correct results.
The first-of-its-kind system will be designed by an Oregon-based firm called Galois, a longtime government contractor with experience in designing secure and verifiable systems. The system will use fully open source voting software, instead of the closed, proprietary software currently used in the vast majority of voting machines, which no one outside of voting machine testing labs can examine. More importantly, it will be built on secure open source hardware, made from special secure designs and techniques developed over the last year as part of a special program at DARPA. The voting system will also be designed to create fully verifiable and transparent results so that voters don't have to blindly trust that the machines and election officials delivered correct results.
not one cent for voter ID.
That is very important and didn't see that listed in there in the top level checkoff marks.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Or, not? WTF?
So, anybody anywhere will be able to modify this voting software & nobody will think adding (extremely hard to detect!) bugs into it, to use as secret backdoors later?
IMHO, anybody who really care about computer/internet security, should/must absolutely stayaway from Open Source Software!!!
And hey, beltway bandits need to eat, too.
building us a voting system?
That would be like the Fox counting the Chickens.....
Rick B.
Vote by mail is growing rapidly and in many places exceeds polling place voting. VBM increases voter turnout and solves so many problems that polling place voting probably isn't worth salvaging.
You voted the way they didn't want you to. They will make "secure voting" to make sure they get the result they want next time.
You are a peon and a piece of shit, get back in your hole and stop complaining. High paid jobs are for their kids that they pay to make sure they get into correct colleges so everyone knows they are not peons.
Trump didn't go to one of their colleges and is unacceptable. Its time for them to "fix things".
Note:
For a year now they have known that the DOJ told the FBI Clinton would not be charged and not to find information to charge her.
For a year now they have known there was no evidence of Russian collusion when they started Muller probe.
Nothing was done with this information for a year. They don't care about being corrupt.
Voter ID is not needed to rig elections.
This special 'secure' open hardware: Will you actually ensure there is a reference platform available, for less than say 500 usd to the average consumer, so that we can develop on, test, diagnose, and verify this hardware ourselves, or use it to ensure the security and authenticity of our own application code?
If not, then it is just a 10 million dollar sham. The software, even if perfectly secure by itself, is not trustworthy unless the underlying hardware is trustworthy, and the underlying hardware isn't trustworthy unless everyone can buy an example of it, ideally right off the production line, and swap/not swap their example for one of the government units, helping to ensure that the entire government run hasn't been compromised itself since they knew the start/end manufacturing serials for their own batch of units.
Obviously they would still need to verify some number of those units to make sure they weren't backdoored (although doing it at the assembly location/warehouse on one big event day would handle it nicely. Once that step is done and the traded serials can be verified in the field, we will have almost trustworthy electronic voting. Particularly if each machine cryptographically signs its voting lists when finished, and ideally provides the voter a hash to verify their vote matches what they input while retaining their anonymity until and unless they need to contest a miscast vote.
What's next, letting EVERY citizen vote?
The voting system will also be designed to create fully verifiable and transparent results so that voters don't have to blindly trust that the machines and election officials delivered correct results.
And ... it comes with a free unicorn!
The only way we can achieve secure voting is to get rid of this stupid notion that voting has to be done in secrecy. Once we do away with that, we could all literally watch our vote get counted. But as it stands, the very nature of secrecy leads to insecurity.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/republicans-finally-have-a-voter-fraud-scandal-and-none-of-them-want-to-talk-about-it/
Having studied this issue for a very long time I'm perpetually frustrated with the Computer scientists constantly injecting overly clever desiderata that can only be implemented at the sacrifice of core requirements of voting systems.
the core requirements are
1. Secret ballot so no one can tell how you voted.
2. Secret ballot so you cannot prove to anyone how you voted even if you want to. (too often ignored)
3. transparency at a level where an ordinary person can reasonably see how the security works
4. Robust against operator errors. Mistakes happen, power gets lost, protocols are not followed.
5. Resistant to cheating.
6. in the event of a failure, Ballots must be re countable-- preferably at a precinct level
What the computer scientists is inject nice-to-have but unnessassary desiderata, like "crytpographic proof your vote was counted" and encrytption. These, to date, always sacrifice one of the requirements. For example, many (not all) proof of vote systems will violate 2, allowing you to prove how you voted. indeed many touch screens allow proving how you voted using a video inside the voting booth (whereas paper ballots have to be publically deposited and videos can be prevented). Many (not all) cryptosystems reduce the number of people who know the keys but this comes at the price of concentration where a few people can change all the ballots without detection, whereas distribnuted precint counting makes whole sale attacks hard.
Serial numbers on ballots, to the voter, appear to offer a way to track their ballot to them. Even if you tell them the cypto prevents this an ordinary person cannot possibly tell that. Ballots need to be indistinguishable.
Thus I worry that people doing this are trying to "improve" something with "more features" that already has a good solution. namely hand marked paper ballots and optical scan.
when an optical scanner breaks down you can still collect the ballots. People can still vote. And you don't get long lines when you are short on equipment or the power goes down because all you need is more pens and desks. Optical scans are easy to recount by humans at a precint level.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
byte ^ cipher_or_key_byte
or let everyone on the planet harass you for your vote cause that's what they do
No IT security will prevent the Democrats from stealing the elections by:
1. Allowing illegals to register and vote (like CA)
2. Trying to eliminate the electoral college
3. Letting convicted felons vote (like FL)
That's why they don't want the wall built, it would effectively crimp their constant flow of future undocumented democratic voters.
I've posted this before, but it's worth saying again.
In the early 2000s, there was a GNU project to build a secure online voting system. They ceased work in 2002, citing the project as being at best difficult and at worst, impossible. They quoted Bruce Schneier, one of the foremost experts in computer security as saying "a secure Internet voting system is theoretically possible, but it would be the first secure networked application ever created in the history of computers... [B]uilding a secure Internet-based voting system is a very hard problem, harder than all the other computer security problems we've attempted and failed at. I believe that the risks to democacy are too great to attempt it."
I see no evidence that Schneier has changed his mind or that any other comparably qualified expert has suggested he's wrong.
The real issue with electronic voting isn't even the hackability of the system. Or the fact that an exploit scales to an entire country. The real problem is that there's no assurance anymore. A very simple process turns into something opaque.
For you americans who don't understand how voting is done properly in the rest of the world, it goes like this:
You put an X in the circle or box of your choice (sometimes several X in several boxes, but nothing too complicated). Then you seal that paper in an envelope or you simply fold it. Then you drop it into a box. That box is watched over by volunteers from all the major parties and basically everyone who cares to spend his time checking that the election is done properly. These same people at the end of the day open the box and count the votes.
At no point is anything not accounted for. At no point is there an attack vector. The whole thing is so simple that an idiot can understand it and that's the point - because it means that every idiot or non-idiot can check it and verify that all is well. Think the box has been tampered with? Go and check the box. Think the paper is special? Go and check the paper. Think some votes were thrown into the box at the beginning of the session? Check the box at the beginning, then seal it, and at the end count the number of paper slips against your very simple tally sheet of people who voted.
There are ways to fuck with the system, of course, there always are. But the low-tech approach also means they are low-tech and can be spotted. Tell me how you'll find the kernel-level backdoor in the voting system that knows which bits to flip in-memory without leaving any traces on the disk. And the number of people capable of validating a system at such a level are low enough to be pressured or bribed.
A highly distributed low-tech system is exactly what we want for something like elections.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I'd bet 100 dogecoins that they're using blockchains. Trendy. That part about transparency kind of tips it off. Whatever happened to paper ballots, anyway?
Have you read my blog lately?
Therefore I do not trust your voting system that I do not fully grok, and/or of which I cannot inspect every detail of the proceedings in person.
And I trust people that do not understand this even less.
And it is still subject to the whims of the people in power and national security - if you can't examine it in detail - how secure is it really?
To be honest, this doesn't sound like something in DARPA's normal wheelhouse. It's not really "defense" nor "advanced."
Are we using DARPA as a slushfund now?
I don't understand how nobody ever mentions this but voting machines can't be both anonymous AND verifiable.
The only way to check on the count is to ask the machine itself so it's no verification at all.
That should be obvious to anyone thinking about it for more than 2 minutes.
But whatever a man can make, a man can break.
E Proelio Veritas.
https://blog.torproject.org/deterministic-builds-part-two-technical-details
The 1960 John F. Kennedy vs. Richard Nixon election is widely acknowledged to have been rigged
There have been no changes in the law to prevent exactly the same thing from happening now and there are no efforts to determine if it still happening.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
First you say the problem is proving your vote was counted. And when that is refuted your comeback is to say there's excess registered voters. That's a logical disconnect and doesn't support your original assertion. You are just flinging mud at the wall and avoiding reason
You didn't mention "blockchain", no funding for you. ;-)
1. First machine is a touch screen. Voters make selections on screen.
2. Once done a paper ballot with their selections is spit out, and they can visually check the ballot
3. Second machine is a optical reader from a different vendor, and must use a different OS from the 1st machine. Paper ballot is inserted and read.
4. Results from both machines are fed to a computer to be compared. If they match, vote goes through. If they do not match, vote is scrubbed and voter asked to try again.
You have verification from two independent systems AND a paper ballot at the end.
You are welcome.
Holy shit, SCORES? Literally DOZENS? Obviously this is a clear and present danger to our democracy! Yikes!
Yeah, because a handful of votes at the "correct" time and place can't have disproportionately wide ramifications ... oh wait
... oh wait.
Now replace parent with employer, phone pics of paper ballot or paper verification for a "bonus".
Or replace employer with a political operative paying out cash.
Its not like these weren't problems in America's past
Has anyone considered the idea of having a computerized input create a paper output? The machine capturing the input from the user wouldn't even necessarily have to store any information (other than the bare minimum for the system to work). The output could be in a grid form, such as a 2D barcode, ensuring consistency in output format (thereby making optical scanners already in use for paper ballots easier to work with) and reducing paper usage. It doesn't solve everything, but it DOES allow for a more digestible interface (for those keen to the movie Idiocracy) and consistent output (no half-marked replies or "dangling chads"...I shudder to even use the phrase).
I read this entire comment thread and was both surprised and disappointed at the lack of the obligatory xkcd.
Open Voting Consortium was working on this issue for a long time.
I think it was mainly Alan Dechert driving it and it ran out of gas due to lack of support and funding?
Wiki --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Voting_Consortium
The DARPA system also uses paper ballots as an intermediary (prints the ballots, then inset into scanner for tabulation.) If you're personally delivering it, the only advantage a "vote by mail" ballot has over this system is that someone else can fill it out for you/observe your vote. Which is only an advantage if you're selling your vote
Your ad here. Ask me how!
So, you read the article and quoted it here. Except #4 doesn't happen automatically (the optical reader tabulates, checked against a human count of the paper ballots). And the whole system is made by one company.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
a new $10 million contract the Defense Department's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has launched to design and build a secure voting system that it hopes will be impervious to hacking.
They're spending $10M on paper ballots and human eyeball counts??
There is massive evidence that illegals vote, they admit it ! This is a far bigger problem of foreign interference in our elections than anything "Russia" did.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/26/texas-officials-flag-tens-thousands-voters-citizenship-checks/?utm_term=.7b53be140cba&noredirect=on
You can find the .pdf of this peer reviewed academic paper that finds they do vote, they admit it.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973
"Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?
Jesse T. Richman a, *, Gulshan A. Chattha b, c, 1, David C. Earnest b
a Department of Political Science, Old Dominion University, BAL 7000, Norfolk, VA 23529, USA b Old Dominion University, USA c George Mason
Over 1000 voters voting in Virginia are non citizens
https://publicinterestlegal.org/files/Report_Alien-Invasion-in-Virginia.pdfUniversity, USA" Electoral Studies 36 (2014) 149e157
Hell, everyone in Chicago know that dead people vote, and California just admitted thousands if illegals were registered to vote with their motor-voter rules
You are believing the Democrat main stream media's lies about this. This is a massive problem, repeatedly lied about in the media. Wake up !
Hell, everyone in Chicago know that dead people vote, and California just admitted thousands if illegals were registered to vote with their motor-voter rules.
and witnesses to watch over the local count.
Candidates suggest some of their own trusted witnesses, gov has a few witnesses, civil society has some witnesses.
Then count the nations votes in front of many witnesses.
Everything adds up as each vote is seen and counted in front of many people.
No code, computers to vote with are needed.
Computer systems are liked by failed nations governments that want to subtly flip votes.
Use paper to vote and photo ID every citizen.
Enjoy some democracy without computers and illegal immigrants voting.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
About Faking Time,
What Surprised me, is not one opensource company has done this.
It's easy, I'll do it for free. Reason why no one succeeds is because the powers don't want democracy
Great Idea! Good luck getting past the crooked politicians! The last thing it seems either of the major parties want is a fair, user level voting system. They both seem to want a system they can rig to the candidate of their choice rather than spending the time to actually find a person qualified to run!
Doesn't matter how secure the vote counting is if it's the voters that have been hacked.
C'mon. By now every child knows it is not possible. Not matter how much money one throws at this.
Oh yeah - they couldn't HACK paper ballots and steal elections, i.e. undermine democracy.
The Robinson Method of voting is fraud proof, needs no electricity, and provides instant results, as soon as the final vote has been cast. Unfortunately the website is now down due to a MYSQL problem:
http://www.paul-robinson.us/index.php/2008/10/25/the_robinson_method_a_really_simple_way_?blog=5
If that site ever comes back up, you'll find a simple and trustworthy method for voting.
The entire election system was rigged, the moment they started to use electronic voting, it's so obviously designed to defraud the American people.
I am all about tech and computers. It's my life.
All voting should be done on paper ballots at a polling place with proper oversight.
Anything else cannot truly be trusted and is a threat to democracy.
Like I'd trust any software from Oregon, the same state that introduced voter fraud by mail, and which Sens. Merkley and Wyden want to see exported nationwide?
FACT: there is no such thing as 100% secure software. Not Fakebook. Not Twitter. Not even Cisco firewalls with their backdoors. Let's go back to in-person voting by precinct using ID, staffed by neighbors, where everybody knows your name ... and face.
Solved.
Large print versions for people like me. Larger scan-tron circles too please. Suggest a specific marker to make filling the bubbles a 2-3 touch thing based on the size of the marker.
The hard part is having the correct version of the paper at the correct location.
But if you vote early like me, that doesn't matter. The biggest hassle to voting early is the postage. They use heavy paper stock, so putting the vote inside an envelop, inside an envelop with all my private data on the outside means it weighs almost exactly 1 oz. I weighed mine last fall. It was just a tad under 1 oz, but the outside envelop claimed, incorrectly, that additional postage would be required.
Voting machines just need to be like a chromebook. TPS chips, read-only OS and data files with the ballot DB being the only thing that isn't read-only.
It must produce human readable paper output that gets put into a ballot box as leaving the location. The paper and voting record in the DB need a crypto-generated-number so they can be matched later. No paper, no vote.
Democracy gets immediate results, which can be human audited for accuracy and public trust is restored. Just don't let them use thermal printing that lasts less than a year. Outsiders need to be able to independently validate, using the paper only, the votes for at least a year.
And stop putting political parties on the ballots. I'm voting for the human, not the party. The parties have way too much power in US elections. This isn't good for democracy. Everyone sees this, except the parties, of course.
As for voter ID. Just mandate that everyone, everywhere, bring their voter registration card with them. That is just as much hassle for everyone. I'd have to search for mine.
Internet-based voting needs to be against federal law. This is a stupid idea and always will be a stupid idea. It is just too easy to DDoS internet connected systems. Also, the whole "anonymous ballot" fails with internet voting.
I'm available for consultation at $300/hr at your location, or $100/hr remotely. I really hate to travel. 25+ yrs experience in huge and tiny-scale systems, including flight control and guidance.
We need anonymized networked implants that only collect an individuals votes and report them anonymously and securely. This is the only way. It will improve voter turnout to 100% everytime, and it will make it impossible for an election to be stolen.
I suppose accurate mind-reading-votes satellites supported by groundbased database is probably a more elegant solution.
There. Pay me the 10 million you dumb fucks.