Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

besson3c · Nov 3, 2006, 02:19 AM

Can anybody make a compelling argument why we should be using these machines for our voting?

I don't care which party errors might allegedly favor, I just think that using a proprietary system like this with several known flaws is asinine.

Also I thought I'd get the debate started now, so that nobody can accuse me of disliking the machines should the Democrats not do as well as expected this election and there are allegations of these machines swallowing Democratic votes (or other fraud taking place).

Seriously, I just think that these machines are a bad idea, and I'd like to know why many obviously think they are a good idea?

chabig · Nov 3, 2006, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I just think that using a proprietary system like this with several known flaws is asinine.

Yeah. That's why Windows has such a low market share.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 09:16 AM

All it'll take is one democrat caught successfully hacking a diebold machine for all the known flaws to be fixed.

besson3c · Nov 3, 2006, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

Yeah. That's why Windows has such a low market share.

I meant that the combination hardware/software is proprietary (including Windows), but yeah, why did they pick the OS with the weakest security model out there? This was also a pretty dumb decision...

chabig · Nov 3, 2006, 10:43 AM

So the machine is insecure. But that doesn't mean it will be hacked. There are multiple levels of security around voting machines.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

All it'll take is one democrat caught successfully hacking a diebold machine for all the known flaws to be fixed.

Are you ever able to drop the partisan bs?

Electronic voting machines have one advantage over paper balloting: speed. That's it. IMO that 'advantage' is negated by the ease with which such technology can be manipulated.

If we're not able to hold elections that are perceived as fair then our democracy will suffer.

This year I've gone a new route that will dictate my voting practices for years to come. I voted absentee earlier this week. I picked up the ballot from my election office, took it home, cast my votes, made a photocopy of the ballot and dropped it off at my election office. Now, if there's any tom foolery, I'll have my own paper trail as a redundant record to compliment the safeguards already in place here in MN.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by art_director

Are you ever able to drop the partisan bs?

Come back to me when you've checked my post history.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

Come back to me when you've checked my post history.

Life's too short to waste time on such things.

besson3c · Nov 3, 2006, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

So the machine is insecure. But that doesn't mean it will be hacked. There are multiple levels of security around voting machines.

One can only hope that this physical security will prevail. Thank goodness that these machines don't seem to be open for remote exploit. The exploits that I've seen involving changing the little removable card in the machines, and other sorts of techniques that require physical access to the machines. When you have physical access to any system, all bets are off...

Still, these machines are still incredibly easy to hack, based on the demos I've seen. There may be remote exploits possible too, I can't remember off the top of my head.

Who knows what sorts of exploits have not been demoed too.

They really should have made this system open source, it is too bad they didn't. I'm sure Diebold has been making a ton of money though - yet another example of corporations cashing in on politics and politicians I guess....

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by art_director

Life's too short to waste time on such things.

Don't make claims you can't back up.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

Don't make claims you can't back up.

You're the one who called out Democrats. That, in my view, is crap. This problem reaches to both sides of the aisle if it undermines our 'democracy.' Republicans are taking heat because it appears they're in bed with Diebold.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

One can only hope that this physical security will prevail. Thank goodness that these machines don't seem to be open for remote exploit. The exploits that I've seen involving changing the little removable card in the machines, and other sorts of techniques that require physical access to the machines. When you have physical access to any system, all bets are off...

Still, these machines are still incredibly easy to hack, based on the demos I've seen. There may be remote exploits possible too, I can't remember off the top of my head.

Who knows what sorts of exploits have not been demoed too.

They really should have made this system open source, it is too bad they didn't. I'm sure Diebold has been making a ton of money though - yet another example of corporations cashing in on politics and politicians I guess....

Two words: paper trail.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by art_director

You're the one who called out Democrats. That, in my view, is crap. This problem reaches to both sides of the aisle if it undermines our 'democracy.' Republicans are taking heat because it appears they're in bed with Diebold.

That's my point exactly.

If Democrats had introduced the machines Republicans would be clamoring about it being unsecure untested technology.

I might add I find it disturbing that for all the flaws that have been exposed Diebold has been dead silent, as far as I recall.

ironknee · Nov 3, 2006, 11:05 AM

one company that makes these electronic voting machines is owned by venezuelans, not sure which one

that is crazy!

chabig · Nov 3, 2006, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

yet another example of corporations cashing in on politics and politicians I guess....

So the corporate world should just provide voting machines for free? My company sells products to the government. I guess we're "cashing in" too. For that matter, I'm sure Apple Computer is "cashing in" as well.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

That's my point exactly.

If Democrats had introduced the machines Republicans would be clamoring about it being unsecure untested technology.

I might add I find it disturbing that for all the flaws that have been exposed Diebold has been dead silent, as far as I recall.

Enjoy.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

So the corporate world should just provide voting machines for free? My company sells products to the government. I guess we're "cashing in" too. For that matter, I'm sure Apple Computer is "cashing in" as well.

Many corporations screw the government. Surely you've heard about $50 screw drivers and the like.

Here in MN there's a company that convinced the state that they should buy their reinforcement bar for road construction. Their specific point of difference is that their rebar is coated with an anti-rust coating. They guarantee their product -- the rebar -- for 100 years. To our elected officials this seemed like it made sense given that we use salt on our roads in the winter. A sober view would reveal that no road in the world -- be it asphalt or concrete -- will last 100 years. So why pay a premium for a product that will never be put to the full test?

That is but one example of how companies screw the gov.

besson3c · Nov 3, 2006, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by art_director

Two words: paper trail.

Are you suggesting all that models of these machines currently leave paper trails?

besson3c · Nov 3, 2006, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

So the corporate world should just provide voting machines for free? My company sells products to the government. I guess we're "cashing in" too. For that matter, I'm sure Apple Computer is "cashing in" as well.

No, what is being sold is a hardware/software combination, this is where the value lies. I'm suggesting that the software in particular be open sourced, and the hardware available for scrutiny. It's the least the company can do for the privilege of being able to sell their machines to the government for this public service that our tax dollars are helping pay for.

There are plenty of companies that make money off of selling open source products.

I suspect that people in the government are still of the mind that it is best to hold one's cards close to their chest (however that expression goes), but this simply doesn't apply the same way in the IT world.

Dork. · Nov 3, 2006, 11:36 AM

Was that HBO documentary on last night? I don't have HBO, but there were some links to reviews on Slashdot that said the HBO documentary was way too over-the-top and crackpotish, and that people who realy support Voting Reform ought to ignore it.

I find Hannibal's (from Ars Technica) take on this pretty interesting. He says that as voting machines get computerized, election security turns into more of an IT-related Information Security issue. And any Information Security expert that looks at the way these voting machines gather votes, and the process by which those votes get communicated to the local Board of Elections, would cry foul. If you're suspicious of the complaints over voting machines as a made-up, partisan thing, please read that article!

The issue of using Windows is a valid one, if only because vulnerabilities in Windows are well-known, and there are other viable OS's that can be used in secure environments. Heck, even embedded OS's and real-time OS's can be used in a more secure manner in these voting machines. I think Windows was used primarily to reduce cost, and simplify the programming by using a more widely-known API (and programmers who don't have soecial knowledge in embedded OS's.) Apparently, we get as much Democracy as we're willing to spend on it.

But current methods of counting votes are not bullet-proof, either. I found a site of an organization committed to Election Reform in New York State. We use (for the most part) lever-based machines here, where we pull small levers to indicate our votes, then one large lever to register them all using gears inside the machine to turn a counter. This site indicates that, when a statistical study of vote counts is done, vote totals ending in "99" pop up much more often than other vote totals, suggesting that these old mechanical machines sometimes don't have the "oomph" to turn more than two elements of the counter at once!

davesimondotcom · Nov 3, 2006, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by art_director

Many corporations screw the government. Surely you've heard about $50 screw drivers and the like.

You do understand that $400 toilet seats and such are most likely an accounting trick to account for money going into skunkworks programs that we never learn about, right?

The toilet seat costs $10 and the other $390 goes into development of a super-secret stealth submarine or something.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Are you suggesting all that models of these machines currently leave paper trails?

No. It's well known they do not.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

You do understand that $400 toilet seats and such are most likely an accounting trick to account for money going into skunkworks programs that we never learn about, right?

The toilet seat costs $10 and the other $390 goes into development of a super-secret stealth submarine or something.

And some of that cash goes to Jack Abrahamoff, oh wait, maybe not anymore...

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2006, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by art_director

Are you ever able to drop the partisan bs?

Hell yeah! I'm soooo tired of his obviously liberal bias!

Down with liberal politicking!!

(It seems you're not observant enough to recognize people from your own side, like Dakar². So, you just start blasting everyone.)

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Hell yeah! I'm soooo tired of his obviously liberal bias!

Down with liberal politicking!!

(It seems you're not observant enough to recognize people from your own side, like Dakar². So, you just start blasting everyone.)

WTF are you talking about?

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

(It seems you're not observant enough to recognize people from your own side, like Dakar². So, you just start blasting everyone.)

BTW, I'm not attacking people posting here. I may not agree with some things that are said and, in those cases, I say so.

As for my side, why don't you tell me what my side is?

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2006, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by art_director

WTF are you talking about?

I'd spell it out for ya, but I'm having trouble typing due to the tears (from laughter) running down my face.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I'd spell it out for ya, but I'm having trouble typing due to the tears (from laughter) running down my face.

Well, since you have nothing to add to the discussion you must make attacks on people. I feel for you.

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2006, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by art_director

Well, since you have nothing to add to the discussion you must make attacks on people. I feel for you.

Speaking of attacks.

Are you ever able to drop the partisan bs?

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Speaking of attacks.

Aren't you clever.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Hell yeah! I'm soooo tired of his obviously liberal bias!

Down with liberal politicking!!

(It seems you're not observant enough to recognize people from your own side, like Dakar². So, you just start blasting everyone.)

Hey don't group me with him!

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2006, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

Hey don't group me with him!

Yeah, that was a cheap shot, sorry man.

hey!_Zeus · 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Yeah, that was a cheap shot, sorry man.

This thread is now about...

art_director · 08:41 PM

Excuse me for pointing out what's it's truly become.

no reason to make the thread gross

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2006, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by hey!_Zeus

This thread is now about...

Exciting and new?

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by art_director

Excuse me for pointing out what's it's truly become.

[img]http://www.nypcsolutions.com/space/gifs/044546_dog-poo.gif[img]

I smell an infraction in your future.

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

I smell an infraction in your future.

For showing a bodily function?

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Exciting and new?

I dunno, boring and old always gets my juices flowin'.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by art_director

For showing a bodily function?

Are they protected speech or something?

art_director · Nov 3, 2006, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar²

Are they protected speech or something?

you know it.

Dakar² · Nov 3, 2006, 05:43 PM

Good luck with that.

besson3c · Nov 4, 2006, 02:30 AM

This thread is going well!

smacintush · Nov 4, 2006, 02:47 AM

I'm not in the IT industry but I remember reading somewhere an saying that goes: The first rule of security is to lock the server room door.

There is NOTHING that will make these machines themselves truly secure. Nothing.

"Physical" security is the one and only thing that will keep these elections fair REGARDLESS of which machines are used. JUST LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER ELECTION IN HISTORY.

The problem with this debate is the very expectation that we could replace human integrity and vigilance with an impenetrable super machine.

ironknee · Nov 4, 2006, 09:09 PM

if you have HBO see Hacking Democracy

HBO: Hacking Democracy

wow! did you know the voting machines are on windows os????

vmarks · Nov 4, 2006, 09:55 PM

Diebold also uses Windows for ATM machines.

Long ago, ATMs ran OS/2, and were stable. Now they run Windows and I have seen them bluescreen. They're win2k or xp pro based. (cue "xp can't bluescreen." mmhmm.)

Besides the pure technical issues, consider the physical security problems: a tape that can be opened and resealed without notice by casual observation.

A key that can be easily obtained online for a few bucks - mini bar, vax cabinet, etc. same key.

No good audit procedure.

turtle777 · Nov 4, 2006, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Are you suggesting all that models of these machines currently leave paper trails?

Na, I'm sure he meant it as an argument FOR paper voting.

-t

mitchell_pgh · Nov 4, 2006, 10:57 PM

IMHO, the current voting machines aren't perfect, but it's as good as paper ballots. What's the difference between me throwing away a handful of ballots or tinkering with some software/hardware?

IMHO, the perfect system would have the following:
1) You would vote on an electronic system
2) you would receive a paper ballot
3) the machine would output a paper ballot

They should report the electronic numbers and verify the number with the paper ballots... and I should be able to call or check online that my vote was tallied correctly.

mitchell_pgh · Nov 4, 2006, 11:02 PM

Originally Posted by vmarks

Besides the pure technical issues, consider the physical security problems: a tape that can be opened and resealed without notice by casual observation.

A key that can be easily obtained online for a few bucks - mini bar, vax cabinet, etc. same key.

No good audit procedure.

What's more likely... I hack such a system... or simply throw out some ballots?

vmarks · Nov 4, 2006, 11:31 PM

Throwing out some ballots can be detected thanks to some tampering with the locked ballot boxes. You'd either have evident tampering or throw out a box, which would also be evident.

Hacking is pretty undetectable on Diebold machines. We want a system that makes hacking more difficult and as evident.

Currently, paper ballots are NOT the same as machines. Machines are NOT as good as.

Voting System Checklists by Rebecca Mercuri

tie · Nov 4, 2006, 11:57 PM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

IMHO, the current voting machines aren't perfect, but it's as good as paper ballots. What's the difference between me throwing away a handful of ballots or tinkering with some software/hardware?

IMHO, the perfect system would have the following:
1) You would vote on an electronic system
2) you would receive a paper ballot
3) the machine would output a paper ballot

They should report the electronic numbers and verify the number with the paper ballots... and I should be able to call or check online that my vote was tallied correctly.

But doing this right requires a technical solution, and that will never sell. And there are real problems. For example, simply giving each voter a paper ballot, as you suggest, opens voters up to coercion.
Freedom to Tinker � Blog Archive � ThreeBallot
Anyway, I voted with a Diebold machine yesterday, and have no confidence that my vote will be counted correctly. These machines are completely insecure.