[Article]More scare stories on e-voting from you know where

Floater

http://www.theregister.com/content/55/34051.html

There is a simple way around this problem. When someone e-votes, print out their ballot paper in black and white. Let them examine it and shove it in the ballot box themselves.

This leaves a secret audit trail and provides a backup mechanism for a recount when and where required.

Floater

bonkey

Thats not a solution. THe problem is that any result from e-voting is inherently untrustworthy right now, so your solution would involve the following steps in every case :

1) Allow the e-vote with some form of "transfer to hardcopy".
2) Discard the e-voting result
3) Count the votes regularly.

If you drop steps 1 and 2, you have the current system, complete with all the uncertainty of whether or not the hardcopy is an accurate reflection of how you actually voted (a la the hanging chad).

So, not only is it no better than the current system, its more expensive, and re-introduces the same uncertainties that the US (for one) is desperately trying to get rid of.

jc

dahamsta

Isn't that exaggerating a little bonkey? Sure there's going to be recounts, particularly when the voting system is new, but in future won't recounts only be requested when results are totally off-base? And with that in mind, won't the system actually work out cheaper in the long term, when the initial investment is cleared?

adam

bonkey

My point is that the current proposed (and implemented) electronic systems have already been shown to be far from trustworthy, and not purely through idiocy on the part of those managing the polling stations.

The only way they will become more trustworthy is by redesigning and replacing the systems. Until that is done, no "workaround" is anything but a "pay for the tech today to hopefully use it in X years time when its actually good enough to be used" mentality. In somewhat more direct terms - a waste of money.

If you have your system sold and installed, what impetus is there on you to improve it? The only one is that you get to sell it a second, third, fourth, etc. time. I'd rather see the various election organisers give a big two fingers to such shoddy hardware and say "come back to us when you have something worth selling". That way we - the taxpayer - buy the system once, when its useable, rather than multiple times when its crap and once when its useable.

jc

dahamsta

I see your point now, although I'm not sure I agree with you. Internet voting is certainly "out there", and Enda Kenny should be taken outside and shot for muddying the water by suggesting it right now, but all in all I support electronic kiosk voting if the system is developed openly and transparently and gets a credible level of support from the tech community. Some of the systems seem quite good, although they do seem to be in a minority. The Australian system with VVAT might do the job.

By the way, I don't know if you're on the eVoting discussion list, but if you're not it's well worth a look. Particularly at the moment, there's some very serious questions being asked about [EDIT: some of the "independent consultants" that approved (oops)] the Irish system. I could probably be accused of libel if I elaborated, so I'll let you decide for yourself -- see the last dozen or so posts on this thread for more.

adam

dahamsta

Speaking of airplanes...

Republicans Back E-Vote Bill
12:07 AM Nov. 19, 2003 PT

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61298,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4

As criticism of electronic voting systems heats up across the nation, three Republicans have signed on to support a bill that would force e-voting machines to produce a paper trail. Previously only Democrats had vowed to support the bill.

Republican congressmen Tom Davis of Virginia, Christopher Shays of Connecticut and New Hampshire's Charles Bass have agreed to co-sponsor the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003, which was introduced to the House in May by Rush Holt (D-N.J.).

The bill would require electronic voting machines that currently don't offer a paper trail, such as touch-screen voting machines, to produce a receipt. The receipts would allow voters to verify that a machine recorded their vote correctly and would be used as an audit trail in case of a computer malfunction or other election irregularity.

[...]

Capt'n Midnight

Originally posted by Floater
Let them examine it and shove it in the ballot box themselves.

The big problem is what happens if the voter does not put the card in the box ?

You could have a little transparent plastic air lock - where the printed receipt would be visible and when you pressed the OK button it would slide down a trapdoor into the ballot box.

But I'm sure I could think of a way of faking these - photobleaching dye and some fax paper (thiosulphate) dye - one becomes invisible with time or light or heat - the other becomes black so your vote can change...

---

Perhaps publish all the voting cards with Zero Knowledge Proofs..

Each voter gets a reciept with a random number and MD5 checksum based on a text file containing the Number and thier voting preferences.

Anyone can look up the random number on the web and verify thier card is there.

They can also see all the other cards - this will not solve vote stuffing but it should eliminate lost votes. (vote suffing could be eliminated by tallymen counting the numbers of people that visit the polling booths.)

Floater

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
Perhaps publish all the voting cards with Zero Knowledge Proofs..

Each voter gets a reciept with a random number and MD5 checksum based on a text file containing the Number and thier voting preferences.

Anyone can look up the random number on the web and verify thier card is there.

What about McDowell's three year data retention of IP numbers and web traffic details? Go online to check if your vote was registered and someone with access to the server that performes this function and the data retention database could surely see how one voted - ie determine the identity of the individual whose vote they were looking at?

Data retention is also probably a threat to a secure internet voting system for similar reasons.

Floater

Capt'n Midnight

Just use the internet at your local library when you go in to check the voters reg (or is that at gard stations with the CCTV cameras focused on the counter ??)

star gazer

originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
Perhaps publish all the voting cards with Zero Knowledge Proofs..

Each voter gets a reciept with a random number and MD5 checksum based on a text file containing the Number and thier voting preferences.

Anyone can look up the random number on the web and verify thier card is there.

They can also see all the other cards - this will not solve vote stuffing but it should eliminate lost votes. (vote suffing could be eliminated by tallymen counting the numbers of people that visit the polling booths.)

but the problem remains that you wouldn't know what went in is actually what came out in the count.

ShaneHogan

There is no safe way to vote over the Internet at present.

First of all, the Internet is by definition a public network with no service level agreement. You have no control over the route that your data takes between client & server. You have no control over whose equipment your data travels over between client & server. You have no service level agreement to guarantee the quality or security of the network. It would almost trivial to create a Denial of Service attack to hit any voting system servers on voting day and disrupt any election.

The particular challenge of voting systems is to guarantee anonymity & security. Other secure systems such as on-line banking or Revenue's ROS service rely on multiple off-line steps to initiate access to the system. But in doing so, they implement traceability, so the central server knows exactly who is submitting a given transaction. This is a mandatory requirement for banking systems but would break the security of the ballot box for a voting transaction.

In an eVoting system, you also need to ensure that the voter does not get any permanent receipt or confirmation of their vote. This is to ensure that the voter cannot sell their vote or be forced to vote in a particular direction under duress. Therefore, any electronic system which would give such a receipt to a voter would not be acceptable. And without such a receipt, how can you be sure that your vote has been recorded correctly and accepted?

eVoting would also open up opportunies for duress within families or houses, whereby an overbearing, dominant family member could force votes for a particular party. The security of the traditional ballot box isn't just a coincidence. It is there to protect the integrity of the system.

The only safe method of electronic voting is with a Voter Verifiable Audit Trail, where a printed receipt is generated behind a protective cover on a voting machine and the voter confirms that the printed vote is correct. The receipt then goes directly into a ballot box without being touched by the voter. In case of inquiry or dispute, the printed copy is the primary source.

star gazer

http://www.irlgov.ie/debates-03/26Nov/Sect3.htm#18

Minister for Environment
The introduction of electronic voting and counting is a desirable modernisation of the electoral system and I look forward to its successful implementation in 2004.

That's about as much evidence of the need for the introduction of the evoting system. It's not even going to be any faster,because they will stagger the release of the count information. All this purely for perception, nothing more.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/2071745?view=Eircomnet

Date set for European and local elections
From:ireland.com
Tuesday, 2nd December, 2003

European and local elections will take place on June 11th, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government announced this evening.

Mr Cullen said polling would take place between 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.

Anybody over the age of 18 is entitled to be register to vote in the local elections and citizenship is not a requirement.

Every Irish and EU citizen living in Ireland aged over 18 and registered in the register of electors is entitled to vote in the European election.

More than three million people are currently registered to vote. A new register of electors will be published on February 1st, 2004.

Voting and counting for all of the elections will be carried out electronically, after the system was successfully piloted in the General Election and referendum last year.

dahamsta

Originally posted by Victor
Voting and counting for all of the elections will be carried out electronically, after the system was successfully piloted in the General Election and referendum last year.

Not if I can bloody help it.

chill

Originally posted by ShaneHogan
There is no safe way to vote over the Internet at present.

One does wonder though - I can purchase expensive merchandise over the net and I can move funds from my bank accounts on the net...

In an eVoting system, you also need to ensure that the voter does not get any permanent receipt or confirmation of their vote. This is to ensure that the voter cannot sell their vote or be forced to vote in a particular direction under duress. Therefore, any electronic system which would give such a receipt to a voter would not be acceptable. And without such a receipt, how can you be sure that your vote has been recorded correctly and accepted?

THIS is a very important point that needs to be highlighted imho.


.

chill

Originally posted by Floater
There is a simple way around this problem. When someone e-votes, print out their ballot paper in black and white. Let them examine it and shove it in the ballot box themselves.
This leaves a secret audit trail and provides a backup mechanism for a recount when and where required.

Though I am a supporter of electronics voting in principle I believe that you suggestion is an excellent one.

We should certainly consider this as an option for the first few major elections using the system.

After all, any business that changes over from a manual system to a computerised system will always be advised to run them in parallel for a couple of months before relying completely on the computer system.

It seems to me that there is little to be lost in using it - and much to be gained in terms of the potential for testing the electonic voting accuracy and of public confidence.

.

star gazer

It would appear that, so far, the Minister for the environment is not taking heed of the concerns surrounding evoting and would gleefully carry on with implementing the envisaged system if he can. It seems a little unwise not to be listening to non-department (or department contracted) voices with suggestions about the system.

bonkey

Originally posted by chill
One does wonder though - I can purchase expensive merchandise over the net and I can move funds from my bank accounts on the net...

All of which is done through companies such as Visa, whom you are already paying to assume much of the risk of these actions on your behalf.

Should your account be subject to fraud, you can simply issue a query against the items in question, and if it can be reasonably shown that you neither ordered nor received them, you will not be charged and the retailers, banks or CC institutions assume the costs.

There is also no anonymity. In order to purchase anything online, you need billing addresses, shipping addresses (if you're purchasing something physical), email addresses, and lets not forget to mention that the retailers are most probably logging your IP and anything else they can get their hands on as well, just to cover their own asses in these cases.

Voting, on the other hand, requires that there is no audit trail remaining. Once your vote is cast, its cast, you can't cast it again, nor can your vote be tracked back to you. (At least, thats how it's generally supposed to work.) There is also no reliable system of being able to prove who the person at the other side of the keyboard is.

Also, online fraud (CC fraud) typically takes quite some time to resolve. While I may be quite happy to wait 3 months for Visa International to go through the necessar steps before removing a charge from my card...do you think the nation would suspend the results of an election for that length of time while waiting to ensure that no complaints were received, or that any received complaints had been processed? Unlikely.

Simply put, there are too many factors to consider regarding both voter anonymity and voter identification.

eVoting (as in "the use of electronic voting machines" is perfectly practical, but I've yet to see a good real-world implemention. iVoting (as in "across the internet") is not.

jc

ShaneHogan

Originally posted by chill
One does wonder though - I can purchase expensive merchandise over the net and I can move funds from my bank accounts on the net...

Hi Chill - Read bonkey's post. There are some key differences which you are ignoring, particularly the need for anonymity and the absence of any query procedures. Minister Cullen is expecting us to have blind trust in a system of which relatively superficial detail is in the public domain.

The stakes are very high here. For your online transaction, the stakes are typically a €400 camera or a €1000 bank transfer. For your vote, the stakes are the control of the nation for the next five years. Just think what your return on investment might be if you were to invest a million or two in taking control of the voting system to allow you to 'steer' the next government in your chosen direction. The current system is a real threat to democracy.

Several 'dissenters' (including me) have been invited to address the Oireachtas committee on the Environment next week (Weds 10th Dec - 2.30 pm). Anyone who is interested should try to come along.

star gazer

originally posted by Shane Hogan
Several 'dissenters' (including me) have been invited to address the Oireachtas committee on the Environment next week (Weds 10th Dec - 2.30 pm). Anyone who is interested should try to come along.

You'd better have your homework done to
a) make the crucial points succinctly and understandably
b) make it news-worthy
c) maintain credibility when under attack from a very strong spin machine

Unfortunately the parliamentary committees don't come accross as being important or note-worthy. Journalists aren't coming to fall nto the palm of your hand, you'll have to work at it.

chill

Originally posted by ShaneHogan
Hi Chill - Read bonkey's post. There are some key differences which you are ignoring, particularly the need for anonymity and the absence of any query procedures.

Yes. I wasn't actually ignoring them though..... I 'did' say I 'wondered' about the system - But I take your point, and his.

Minister Cullen is expecting us to have blind trust in a system of which relatively superficial detail is in the public domain.

This is a different question as I was responding to the internet voting issue. I have less concern about the evoting, though I did agree with the proposal for dual system operation for a period of time.

The current system is a real threat to democracy.

I really don't see any evidence of that. I do have concerns but I don't see any serious reasons to be as dramatic as that.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by chill
I really don't see any evidence [that the proposed e-voting system is a threat to democracy].

It's simple, really: with the system as it is proposed, there is just no way that we can ever be certain that the votes people cast will be counted correctly. Once you've hit the 'Cast Vote' button, your vote disappears into a digital black hole.

Wouldn't you like to have an assurance - from someone you trust - that the machine works as advertised? I know I would.

chill

Originally posted by oscarBravo
It's simple, really: with the system as it is proposed, there is just no way that we can ever be certain that the votes people cast will be counted correctly. Once you've hit the 'Cast Vote' button, your vote disappears into a digital black hole.

Wouldn't you like to have an assurance - from someone you trust - that the machine works as advertised? I know I would.

I'm inclined to believe the experts unless and until there is some semblance of evidence that there si a problem.

And I have said that I do support dual operation.

dahamsta

Originally posted by chill
I'm inclined to believe the experts

Hmmm, define experts. Cullen says that his experts say it's a-ok, but Cullen is quite likely the least qualified person in the country to judge. He's also Fianna Fáil's Director of Local Elections next year, which is nice.

unless and until there is some semblance of evidence that there si a problem.

You mean like when there's a huge upset in the local elections and it takes a year or two to rip the pretenders back out of the council seats? Or should we wait for the general election and set ourselves up for a nice march on Leinster House, like Georgians?

This isn't a few incompetent or corrupt ministers or TDs we're talking about here, it's society as a whole. The administration is one of the pillars of our society, and the foundation of the administration is elections. If the ballot can be cheated or broken the pillar will fall, and society will be damaged. It might take years but it will happen, and this is why the ballot has to be trusted.

adam

Capt'n Midnight

Originally posted by dahamsta
Hmmm, define experts. .... Or should we wait for the general election and set ourselves up for a nice march on Leinster House, like Georgians?

Can't resist
Expert
- Well as any mathematicial will tell you X is the unknown quantity.
- And a Spurt is simply a Drip under pressure (why does this sound like a gneric junior minister ?)

The thing is - if a problem is detected in the at some stage in the future then all elections up to that point would have to be treated as suspect, and hence all controversioal legleslation or decisions would be called into question. Look at the states - there are a few people a little upset at the closeness of Bush's election - the margin of error is larger than the margin of victory...

How would you feel if the present government used electronic voting on a referendum to abolish PR ??? - suppose it passed by 1000 votes ???

In an election the Ballot is secret - but every thing else is open. ie. No one knows who voted for whom but everyone should know how many votes were cast etc.

Ever seen expert witnesses in a court room ? (no I haven't) but you will find enough experts to suite your case if you tried hard enough.. -eg: Creationism

ShaneHogan

Originally posted by chill
I'm inclined to believe the experts unless and until there is some semblance of evidence that there si a problem.

Which experts? Do you mean the many Irish IT professionals & academics who have expressing serious concerns about the current system on
the Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Voting discussion list? Or the two IT professionals (including the former Head of the Centre for Software Engineering at DCU/former Head of the Software/IT
section of the National Board for Science & Technology) with 60 years IT experience between who pointed out the many holes in the current system in the Labour Party report ?

The big problem with the Minister's much heralded 'six independent consultancies' who have supposedly approved the system is that each of the six were given very narrow briefs. None of the six were asked to report on the key question - Is this the best system, in terms of reliability, security and value for money for the Irish state? The one independent consultancy Zerflow that did review the security of entire system raised a number of important issues issues which have basically been swept under the carpet?

And finally, without the all important Voter Verifiable Audit Trail, there will never be that semblance of evidence that you require - it just won't exist. We just see buttons being pressed at one end and a printed report of the count at the other end - it will be impossible to provide the system to be faulty once it gets into operation. Any complaint will simply be dismissed as sour grapes.

vinnyfitz

Quote:


Too many elections teeter on a few hundred votes, and candidates rightly expect human beings to be able to double-check the results. America's election apparatus needs to move firmly and quickly into the computer age. But the public must feel secure that each vote is really counted. At this stage, a voter-verified paper trail offers the public that necessary security .


link (but you have to subscribe)

Capt'n Midnight

Questions you can ask of vendors http://abusabletech.org/vote/questions.html

De Rebel

Originally posted by ShaneHogan
Several 'dissenters' (including me) have been invited to address the Oireachtas committee on the Environment next week (Weds 10th Dec - 2.30 pm). Anyone who is interested should try to come along.

Shane

How did the session go?

vinnyfitz

The "dissentors" seem to have got a pretty good hearing.
I noted the following outcomes:

Decision of the committee to ask Minister Cullen to postpone implementationtill the committee has completed its deliberations
Article in last Thursday's Irish Times reporting committee proceedings;
Anti e-voting speaker on Pat Kenny show Thursday who got sympathetic hearing
Anti e-voting editorial in the Irish Times - Friday?
Committee meeting again next week to try to reconcile conflicting info coming from dissentors and Minister and officials.

Seems like a good example of Parliament in action really.

ShaneHogan

Apologies for delay in responding. Last week's meeting went very well. Margaret gave a great performance and responded to some tough questions brilliantly. Myself & Robert did our best to break some myths particularly in relation to the 'six independent consultancies'. The area of our presentation which got most attention was our revelation that up to 5th Dec, the actual contracts for the new system had not been signed. I can't claim credit for this nugget - another concerned citizen who has been hammering the Dept with FOI requests got this in one of his responses.

The committee is considering this topic again on Thursday next 18th Dec at 10.30 am. I understand that the Dept officials and some of the dissenting voices will be present.

I must give credit to the Chairman of the committee Sean Power for ensuring that a constructive & impartial debate was conducted.