An idea for a nationwide voting system

[merwin]

I posted this idea as a response somewhere else, but thought i'd post it here too. It's for a secure and open voting system (yes, the two can co-exist... look at linux).

First, all software and hardware involved will have extensive code reviews by various universities, and the public will have access to the source code. All machines will have the software burnt into ROM, so it cannot be altered.

Have the voting machines linked up to a SECURE database of registered voters, with every voter being given a PIN after they vote, where they can later look up whether or not their vote was recorded, and get a copy of their ballot if they want to.

All machines print paper ballots directly into cases that lock when removed from the machine, as well as storing them in the central database, and after the election ends, these cases will be plugged into a central machine that unlocks the cases and counts the printed ballots.

If the counts don't match, there will be an extensive review of WHY they don't match, with a peer reviewed, acceptable reason before the votes will be certified.

Working at an election booth will be a JOB that you get paid to do, and extensive training on it, as well as reviews by supervisors. Everything you do while you are working election booth will be biometrically recorded, and it will be a felony to tamper with even a single vote.

This may cost some money, but it will definately be less expensive than the 200 billion or so that we've spent on the war thus far. Which do we value more? Democracy, or war?

[Nederland]

1. Illegal in many states

Have the voting machines linked up to a SECURE database of registered voters, with every voter being given a PIN after they vote, where they can later look up whether or not their vote was recorded, and get a copy of their ballot if they want to.

In many states, this capability would be illegal. It's illegal because it would enable candidates to buy people's votes. When you can't prove how you voted, its pretty much impossible to buy someone's vote.

[merwin]

2. How does that prevent people from buying votes?

You can buy people's votes as it is, just not as efficiently (ie: no way to get your money's worth by actually verifying that the person voted that way).

Using that logic, any voting machine that spits out a receipt that you could keep would be illegal as well.

[riqster]

3. No way

There is not now, nor will there ever be, a truly secure computer.

[FogerRox]

6. A secure computer is one that is locked up in a room--and

on-one has the key

>wink<

[merwin]

8. When was the last time you heard of a bank being hacked into?

Yet, you can go online and do transfers, manage your account, etc.

[Internut]

10. This is only a partial list:

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/7378/hacker.htm

1990.10.15 hackers break into British clearing banks

1991.07.00 Justin Petersen (Agent Steal) arrested for hacking into a bank's computer and transferring funds

1994.06.13 Citibank hacked by Vladimir Levin; $12 million in illegal transfers

1996.01.22 Chaos taps cleartext transmission of banking information

1996.10.22 hackers crack Czech banks; steal $2 million

1997.12.15 money shifted from 208 German bank accounts; security codes changed

1997.12.30 First National Bank, Brookings, SD web site hacked

1998.01.05 Sukura Japanes bank database broken into - customer data stolen Fujisawa

1998.01.10 Citizens Bank homepage hacked getwork guerillas


2001.08.21 Washington-based Riggs bank Visa customer database hacked into

[merwin]

13. I'm 99% sure that half of those are due to poor security implementation.

IE: Any of the database break-in's, the cleartext transmission, website hacking, which leaves 5 incidents in the last 15 years that don't say how access was gained. I would put money down that it was fairly easily preventable, which is why I suggested a complete peer review of the setup by as many universities and individual citizens as possible.

[Wilms]

14. I agree. Poor security implementation.

Same with the e-vote set-up.

So...?

You'll never get me to trust it. NO CONFIDENCE!

[merwin]

17. Even if you had 10,000 people reviewing each aspect of it?

With that number of people, you are guaranteed to get a bipartisan review.

The problem with going to a straight paper ballot system is that ballots can be lost, removed, added, etc. It's amazingly easy to tamper with at a local level. Grassroots election fixing.

Do you trust your bank to keep your money safe? Or do you have no confidence in their computer systems and would be more comfortable with keeping the money under your mattress :-)

If you think of the concept like an ATM, the security aspect becomes much clearer. It's damn near impossible to get money out of an ATM without destroying the ATM itself.

Why do we trust ATM's? Because we have confidence that the software was programmed in order to be 100% sure not to lose ANY money, because the banks would lose money (and that not be acceptable to them), and they KNOW exactly where your money is at all times.

Why don't we trust the current E-Voting machines? Because the software that is running them cannot be reviewed, and can have any number of holes.

If you remove the cloak from the software and have a system that bulletproof and completely transparent (yet secure) and can be tracked 100% of the way, then I think people would be much more willing to accept it.

[Wilms]

19. I'd pretty-near say the exact opposite about each of those points.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x374376

[merwin]

20. So tell me, why do you trust your bank and ATM not to be hacked

and your money stolen?

[Wilms]

4. Your logic is correct.

That's why you can't keep the "receipt".

[Nederland]

25. I already explained it

It prevents people from buying votes because there is no way for them to verify their "purchase". To say that verification merely makes the process "inefficient" is a gross understatement. Think of it this way, a candidate is offering $10 bucks for your vote. Without being able to verify how you voted, how exactly would that payment work? Would you walk up to the candidate's campaign headquarter after voting and say "hey, I voted for your guy, give me my $10. I know I can't prove it, but give me my $10 anyway..."

The whole idea of buying votes without verification isn't merely inefficient, its ridiculous.

[riqster]

12. Voter registration databases are vulnerable to hacking

Because they are linked to other state agencies like the BMV. Lots of interdependencies mean lots of holes in security.

Plus, if you have a situation like we have in Ohio where Fox Blackwell is in chage of that 'secure' system, you're pretty well fucked.

[merwin]

15. No interdependencies. A country-wide voter registration system.

Like it or not, we almost have that already (anyone heard of selective service?).

The system would not be linked to any outside agencies. The data would be given in an accepted format, encrypted on disc to be imported in the system.

The key to all of this is to have the process as open as possible. The more people watching, the less chance there is of tampering. Each part of the process could be subjected to observers and constant video/audio monitoring.

[Wilms]

5. Your thought is appreciated.

However:

"Have the voting machines linked up to a SECURE database of registered voters, with every voter being given a PIN after they vote, where they can later look up whether or not their vote was recorded, and get a copy of their ballot if they want to."

Won't fly. It's open to vote selling, or even worse, someone demanding to know how you voted (employer, abuser, whatever).

[FogerRox]

7. additionally Hardwired chips can be used--might be better than burning any

thing

[merwin]

9. OK then, scrap that element :-) Just be able to look up IF your vote was

recorded.

[autorank]

11. Let's outsource it! Think I'm kidding, think it wouldn't work.

In India they developed a national e-voting system in a couple of years and it's been implemented and works well. This is of real interest. The political parties in India don't just argue, they fight. Politics is an intense passion. The parties have a visceral hate for each other. Yet they all agree that their e-voting system is fair.

I have a modest proposal

Let's get the Indian system plus Indian poll workers to come over here for our Federal and State elections. We can have bipartisan contracting and oversight and be sure that there is one system that works.

Now, how does that sound--the world's largest democracy helping the worlds, well, whatever, democracy get it together.

[merwin]

16. I think that the republicans would bitch and moan about about foreigners

being able to manipulate the system. I guess the neocons want to save that for themselves.

Although, I do think that their system might be something to look at as a model to base it off of. There's plenty of smart people over there that are amazing programmers.

[autorank]

21. Isn't that cool, $200 a pop...simiple, secure...

We're a bunch of clowns in this department. Even Venezuela, which had problems, got kudos from the Carter Center.

I like this thread. It's practical stuff.

[autorank]

18. Intl. e-voting: India, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Canada, etc.

Nice article on Venezuela & India

Biz Week on India's $200 Voting Machines, Yes $200

Summary of several foreign e-voting efforts

Indian blogger post on their system

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

Contact the DNC and Give 'em Hell About NOT Acting on Election Fraud

[merwin]

22. Very nice! Simple, not hackable, secure.

[autorank]

23. Someone made a very simple point somewhere on DU

They said they'd used a variety of Deibold banking teller machines for years and had never encountered one single problem with a paper receipt. I thought, no kidding. I stopped using ATM's about 12 years ago but they always popped out the receipts.

One has to wonder what the major malfunction is, why are ours so expensive, so insecure, so incapable of producing paper.

??????????????????????????

[merwin]

24. Simple. Banks pay big bucks for that. Neocons pay big bucks to

avoid printing out proper paper trails.