More re. electronic voting machines - some states are now considering the vulnerabilities

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
To follow up on an earlier thread -- which I can't find -- here's an article from the Washington Post about some states' growing concerns about electronic voting machines. I think this is a good thing. Once they recognize the vulnerability, the states can push for changes to make electronic voting machines secure and auditable.

Here's an excerpt:
Jolted Over Electronic Voting - Report's Security Warning Shakes Some States' Trust
The Virginia State Board of Elections had a seemingly simple task before it: Certify an upgrade to the state's electronic voting machines. But with a recent report by Johns Hopkins University computer scientists warning that the system's software could easily be hacked into and election results tampered with, the once perfunctory vote now seemed to carry the weight of democracy and the people's trust along with it.

An outside consultant assured the three-member panel recently that the report was nonsense.

"I hope you're right," Chairman Michael G. Brown said, taking a leap of faith and approving Diebold Election System's upgrades. "Because when they get ready to hang the three of us in effigy, you won't be here."

Since being released two weeks ago, the Hopkins report has sent shock waves across the country. Some states have backed away from purchasing any kind of electronic voting machine, despite a new federal law that has created a gold rush by allocating billions to buy the machines and requiring all states, as well as the District of Columbia, to replace antiquated voting equipment by 2006.

[ ... ]
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
I'm disappointed no one has commented on this. I sincerely believe that the future of American democracy* rests on what happens next. Do the rest of you disagree with its significance, or do you just not care?

(*To the inevitable pedants in the crowd: yeah, we're really a constitutional republic or whatever. The distinction is irrelevant to the discussion, and no one else cares anyway.)
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I'm disappointed no one has commented on this. I sincerely believe that the future of American democracy* rests on what happens next. Do the rest of you disagree with its significance, or do you just not care?

(*To the inevitable pedants in the crowd: yeah, we're really a constitutional republic or whatever. The distinction is irrelevant to the discussion, and no one else cares anyway.)
No system is perfect and it is good that these defects in these voting systems are being found now, rather than right before the 04 election.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I'm disappointed no one has commented on this. I sincerely believe that the future of American democracy* rests on what happens next. Do the rest of you disagree with its significance, or do you just not care?

(*To the inevitable pedants in the crowd: yeah, we're really a constitutional republic or whatever. The distinction is irrelevant to the discussion, and no one else cares anyway.)
No system is perfect and it is good that these defects in these voting systems are being found now, rather than right before the 04 election.
Agreed. The question is what will they do to fix the problem before 11/04? That's not much time for something of this magnitude.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I'm disappointed no one has commented on this. I sincerely believe that the future of American democracy* rests on what happens next. Do the rest of you disagree with its significance, or do you just not care?

(*To the inevitable pedants in the crowd: yeah, we're really a constitutional republic or whatever. The distinction is irrelevant to the discussion, and no one else cares anyway.)
No system is perfect and it is good that these defects in these voting systems are being found now, rather than right before the 04 election.
Agreed. The question is what will they do to fix the problem before 11/04? That's not much time for something of this magnitude.
Maybe, maybe not. The FEC needs to mandate controls or atlease set guidlines for makers to follow. From your link it sounds like some makers already know the solution- puting printers on them so people can view their "ballot" before dropping them in the "ballot" box.

The other question is wether or not local officials will pony up the dough before the '04 election since IIRC they don't have to have changes in place till '06, right?

CkG
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: SuperTool
they better not run elections on MS software.
The Diebold machines reportedly use MS-Access to hold voting results.

This could easily be swapped for MSDE(sql server light) and the data would be much more secure.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY