NO to internet voting in WA state!!!

[eridani]

NO Internet voting!

Tell The WA Legislature and Secy-of-State Sam Reed, to deep-six the proposal for Internet Voting. Not even as a special case for special voters. HB1624 & SB 5522 must be withdrawn.

I am a powerful aficionado of the internet, and of the power of computers. I operate many discussion lists and several websites. No curmudgeon or troglodyte, am I.

But in NO WAY can I concur with voting via the internet - or any similar means of electronic communications! They are all inherently insecure and not private. I even testified against the once-proposed "Project SERVE", to a US panel about 6-8 years ago, and the Feds dropped the proposal. I have to believe that all the knowledgeable folks who raised objections and questions, were convincing.

So now, why does Sam Reed, WA State Secretary of State and the chief elections officer of the state, propose this again?

One hacker/insider could do either or both of two horrible acts:
* interfere with the voting data being sent - the ballots - in any number of ways;
* gain the knowledge of how the voter voted, and use that information in any number of malicious ways.

No i-voting.

No DRE-voting.

V.V.P.B. Only.

My friend in Brazil, where they already have a national system of cyber-interconnecte d DRE's run by a single bureaucracy which serves as Administrator, Judge, Jury, and Advocate in cases of complaints, says:
"I know who I voted for.
So do They.
But only They know for whom my vote was counted!"

I would add: Even though they say that they do not - I believe that they can tell others who I voted for. Nice, no? No.

Tell The WA Legislature and Sam Reed, to deep-six the proposal for Internet Voting. Not even as a special case for special voters - service voters and overseas voters.
http://apps. leg.wa.gov/ billinfo/ summary.aspx? bill=1624&year=2009
http://apps. leg.wa.gov/ billinfo/ summary.aspx? bill=5522&year=2009

[DontTreadOnMe]

1. And?

Are you for not allowing internet banking as well? I find is easy to login to my bank and check my balance.
I can have a receipt sent to my home address.

This could easily work for voting online. Every voter would have a secure, unique ID.
When you vote, you get an email confirmation of your vote.

When the votes are tabulated, the results can be VERIFIED by each voter... online.
A voter could go login to a U.S. Gov. website to check their vote.
It would BE VERY EASY to verify an online posting result with that of an official election result.

Any tampering of voting could easily be traced, and prosecuted.
Banks don't have ANY trouble handling millions of banking transactions per day, each with exact receipts that are accessible, instantly.


Voting with paper ballots would be much easier to tamper with, and or lose or get misplaced.

[napoleon_in_rags]

14. I could hack that system, for an individual.

If I had control of their computer. The Internet is not secure enough to trust our democracy to. Banking is no comparison, because fraudulent transactions are trackable, in terms of who the money goes to. And in the end the user always becomes aware of the missing money. But with votes, DNS hijacking is about all it takes, and the person will never know. I tell your computer that vote.wa.us (or wherever you vote at) is at a computer I host, which acts as a proxy to the real site. I flip your vote, but leave the rest of the information you post, and I flip your vote when you log in to check. So two filters are in place but the rest of the data is exactly the same as the site you vote at. Its not too tough, the Internet is much more fragile than it appears.

And this is for one computer, but there was a case recently where I hacker found a way to break ALL the DNS on the Internet:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-12/ff_kaminsky?currentPage=all

[eridani]

16. This is just bullshit. There is a unique identifier linking all transactions to your bank

You can't have that and still have a secret ballot. Typical naive luser--listen to real computer security experts for a change.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Agree!!!!! It makes it harder for a secret ballot. Spouses, etc. will try to influence each other.

And you miss out on the collective experience of voting.

[DontTreadOnMe]

3. You are in the wrong marriage!

If you can't make decisions for yourself in fear of your spouse!

Collective experience of waiting in line to vote? Are you serious????
Is your hobby hanging out at the DMV?


I am in favor of every vote counting, and getting counted correctly.
It can easily be done online with good software. THe software needs to be developed and inspected openly.
IT IS EASY TO CREATE CODE THAT IS SECURE, and can have a system that can detect any tampering.

If you think banking transactions are not secure, you would see more hacking into banking systems.
That is where all the money is located. Banks take is very serious. Our U.S. Govt could do the same for voting.
There are people who DO NOT want a serious, secure voting system.

[Captain Hilts]

4. Sorry, just years studying voting behavior and working in polling.

Men try to influence their wives votes. Women are much more vulnerable to spousal pressure than men are.

[DontTreadOnMe]

5. huh?

What does this have to do with internet voting?

If you are afraid of your spouse, then you could go to the library and use a computer there to vote.

It's the quality of the SOFTWARE that counts! (no pun intended)

[Captain Hilts]

6. One spouse can watch the other, or feel offended if the other wants privacy while voting. nt

[DontTreadOnMe]

8. so by your logic...

spousal pressure ONLY occurs with internet voting, but in no other voting methods... so you are against internet voting.

Or would the more logical scenario be that most people would either vote at work or at home, at different times... so they would not be standing, looking over the shoulder of thier spouse while voting.

Spousal influence is a separate topic than can affect ALL voting methods, but don't try to inject it into a major cause against internet voting. It's a weak argument.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Actually, the same argument is made about absentee ballots since many states require a witness.

I had to have one when I voted absentee in Virginia.

Folks, I'm not pulling this stuff out of my butt.

Spousal influence does NOT affect voting behavior in a private voting booth.

Conversation over. You don't know what you're talking about.

[DontTreadOnMe]

10. Fool on the Hill?

Private Voting booths do not guarantee that your vote was actually counted!

How do you verify that your vote counted after you leave a voting booth? Any receipt? Any way to double check the next day?

Conversation NOT OVER! Don't be afaid of the internet. I do know what I am talking about. The internet IS the future. no hanging chads on the internet :)

[Captain Hilts]

11. Here you go...

the most reliable machine:

[DontTreadOnMe]

12. IS that how you do your banking too?

Voting on the internet is coming soon. You can help create the standards, or get out of the way.

Does your spouce decide your dinner too?

[pnwmom]

13. I'm not worried about my own spouse. But there are millions of people out there

including one of my sisters, who might be reluctant to vote for someone opposed by their spouses.

There are very good reasons for a secret ballot, and we should never give up that right.

[norepubsin08]

7. Good for you

I'll bring it up at our next board meeting with America in Solidarity-Mike C

[eridani]

17. The bill # is HB 1624. Please tell everyone you know in WA state to get on this n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

15. Will do.

Must say, I'm not trilled about being required to vote absentee next time. My dad used to tell my mom exactly how to fill out her ballot.. That makes it easier for people like him.

I already miss community polling places. One less thing to take your kids to, to see Democracy in action.