[FoRK] Irregularities, or the lack thereof
jm at jmason.org
Wed Nov 3 10:25:38 PST 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Jeffrey Kay writes:
> BTW, when I voted on the WinVote machine in my precinct, my first
> reaction as I finished was to ask the voting official for a receipt (he
> looked at me like I was from another planet). I couldn't help notice
> that the power on those devices was daisy chained, so if you unplug the
> first, the rest are screwed. I was also wondering if they used hard
> disks or flash to store the votes. If a hard drive crashed, you'd be
> toast. And, of course, being Windows machines, I wondered whether the
> write cache was disabled in the O/S -- I've had to clean up too many
> computers that died before that cache was flushed.
Most of the DRE voting machines use flash -- namely PCMCIA memory cards
for the most part, if I recall correctly. Worth noting that in Belgium
a couple of years back, one candidate received 4096 extra votes without
any irregularities being detected by their DRE voting systems.
That number look familiar to any computer scientists? ;)
Also, in this election, an optical-scan counting server suffered flash
memory failure and lost its vote data. thankfully, though, since it
was optical-scan paper ballots, they can be recounted.
BTW, check out the case of the missing Diebold counting server's audit
log: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/#breaking .
I doubt it *really* was likely to be hacked, but this kind of sloppiness,
and the subsequent "nothing to see here" hand-waving from election
officials, is crazy!
> It really calls into question whether there's some system that can be
> put into place to solve some of the voting fraud issues. As a voter,
> you want your vote to be assured, yet private. When the Bushies come
> after you, you want to have complete deniability regarding who you
> voted for. However, in the event of a recount, you'd like to be able
> to offer some positive proof of your vote. I was contemplating this
> while waiting for an hour in line to vote, but it seems like an almost
> impossible problem. There are aspects that of this problem that
> reminded me a bit of the digital money concept that some folks worked
> on about 5 years or so ago. Perhaps there's a hint there.
FWIW, all my looking into voting technology and its issues has led me to
believe that there's no better system than the good old optical-scan paper
ballot. (I'm vaguely involved with ICTE, http://evoting.cs.may.ie/ , so
I've been following this issue keenly for the past year or two.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the FoRK