Ban on Wireless Modems In Voting Machines Should be Optional, Suggests US Election Agency (apnews.com) 147
The U.S. agency overseeing elections has "quietly weakened a key element of proposed security standards..." reports the Associated Press, "raising concern among voting-integrity experts that many such systems will remain vulnerable to hacking."
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is poised to approve its first new security standards in 15 years after an arduous process involving multiple technical and elections community bodies and open hearings. But ahead of a scheduled February 10 ratification vote by commissioners, the EAC leadership tweaked the draft standards to remove language that stakeholders interpreted as banning wireless modems and chips from voting machines as a condition for federal certification. The mere presence of such wireless hardware poses unnecessary risks for tampering that could alter data or programs on election systems, say computer security specialists and activists, some of whom have long complained than the EAC bends too easily to industry pressure.
Agency leaders argue that overall, the revised guidelines represent a major security improvement. They stress that the rules require manufacturers to disable wireless functions present in any machines, although the wireless hardware can remain.
In a February 3 letter to the agency, computer scientists and voting integrity activists say the change "profoundly weakens voting system security and will introduce very real opportunities to remotely attack election systems." They demand the wireless hardware ban be restored...
The ban on wireless hardware in voting machines would force vendors who currently build systems with off-the-shelf components to rely on more expensive custom-built hardware, said EAC Chair Benjamin Hovland, which could hurt competition in an industry already dominated by a trio of companies. He also argued that the guidelines are voluntary, although many state laws are predicated on them... Hovland stressed that the amended guidelines say all wireless capability must be disabled in voting equipment. But computer experts say that if the hardware is present, the software that activates it can be introduced. And the threat is not just from malign actors but also from the vendors and their clients, who could enable the wireless capability for maintenance purposes then forget to turn it off, leaving machines vulnerable...
Experts are pushing for universal use of hand-marked paper ballots and better audits to bolster confidence in election results.
Agency leaders argue that overall, the revised guidelines represent a major security improvement. They stress that the rules require manufacturers to disable wireless functions present in any machines, although the wireless hardware can remain.
In a February 3 letter to the agency, computer scientists and voting integrity activists say the change "profoundly weakens voting system security and will introduce very real opportunities to remotely attack election systems." They demand the wireless hardware ban be restored...
The ban on wireless hardware in voting machines would force vendors who currently build systems with off-the-shelf components to rely on more expensive custom-built hardware, said EAC Chair Benjamin Hovland, which could hurt competition in an industry already dominated by a trio of companies. He also argued that the guidelines are voluntary, although many state laws are predicated on them... Hovland stressed that the amended guidelines say all wireless capability must be disabled in voting equipment. But computer experts say that if the hardware is present, the software that activates it can be introduced. And the threat is not just from malign actors but also from the vendors and their clients, who could enable the wireless capability for maintenance purposes then forget to turn it off, leaving machines vulnerable...
Experts are pushing for universal use of hand-marked paper ballots and better audits to bolster confidence in election results.
Aircraft safety is important (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Aircraft safety is important (Score:2, Offtopic)
You know, I just wish this social mind cancer that has befallen US society, where everybody is on some "side" against each other, and talks like you in your comment, would die.
I'm specifically not saying you are "worse" than others. It's more that that is the standard of how we treat each other now. And that is fucked up.
(Call me off-topic, but this matters.)
There is no "left". There is no "right".
There are only people. With needs.
If they all get what they need, the beef gets buried.
So, can I make a proposa
Voter suppression Re: Aircraft safety is important (Score:3, Insightful)
Itâ(TM)s pretty hard to reach consensus with people who strait up do not agree with the laws or their implementation. One group wants for example Voter ID. The other group doesnâ(TM)t (presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor their side?).
To point out the arguments on the other side: the typical voter ID laws work like this:
1. We require stringent government issued voter ID.
2. We require that ID to be in a form that poor people don't always have.
3. We tell them "but you can get an ID by presenting 2 forms of ID at any office of the Department of Motor Vehicles
4. Due to budget cuts, all of the offices of the Department of Motor Vehicles in poor neighborhoods were just closed. You can go to one in a rich suburb, but they aren't accessible by p
Re: Voter suppression Re: Aircraft safety is impor (Score:2)
POINT #2 is a racist and biased remark without proof. Any citizen can get a state birth certificate.
Re: (Score:2)
Since when is proof of citizenship not proof of citizenship for voting?
Re: (Score:3)
There’s always a DMV near the central city. They aren’t open in “rich neighborhoods” as they generate a lot of traffic which rich people don’t want on the neighborhoods,
Oh, indeed, there were DMV offices in the poorer neighborhoods... Right up until they implemented the tough voter ID laws. At which point they were closed because of "budget cuts".
From For Alabama’s Poor, the Budget Cuts Trickle Down, Limiting Access to Driver’s Licenses [nytimes.com]: ... As of last week, Tuscaloosa is the nearest location where a person here can get a dri
"It is about an hour and 10 minutes to Tuscaloosa, the nearest big city to this little knot of houses and churches in the Alabama pines.
Re: Voter suppression Re: Aircraft safety is impor (Score:4, Interesting)
Note that pert of the initiative also made it harder to prove your identity sufficiently to get the state issued ID in the first place. I'll bet if one day your various elements of ID were poofed away you'd have quite a difficult time getting them all replaced due to interlocking requirements? Need a new DL, just show us your social security card? Need a new Social Security card so you can get your new DL? Just show us your driver's license (OOPS).
Source, My late wife had her purse snatched a few years ago. Household bills are in my name. Funny how the same state that wouldn't just issue her a new ID because they "couldn't be sure she was who she said she was" had no problem calling her for jury duty and seating her as a juror. Perhaps you can see why I wonder if the barriers to getting that ID card might not be entirely necessary. Side note, an election happened in this time frame. She was able to vote because our state doesn't require a reason to get an absentee ballot.
Maybe you did the impossible (not what they want) (Score:5, Insightful)
You may have just done that which you said was impossible.
It took me until middle age to really learn this well, but I learned something a few years ago. (I guess I knew it intellectually before, but it really sank in a few years ago). You said:
> One group wants for example Voter ID. The other group doesn't (presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor their side?). We can't have consensus.
What I realized a few years ago, and my six year old seems to already know, is that voter ID isn't actually the thing they want. You said "presumably because there is an impression illegal votes favor ". One group wants the election to follow the law. They want to have legal votes, and only legal votes, counted. Voter ID is one way to do that. Actually counting legal votes is just a method toward the real goal of fair elections.
The other group tells me they want to ensure that poor people / black people who can't get ID are able to vote.* They want for people who are legally eligible to vote to have their votes counted. That's so we have fair elections. (I'm assuming here that most of the rank and file don't want to cheat.)
What both groups want is for people who are legally eligible to vote to be able to vote and have their vote counted. Both groups really want fair elections. You make both sides happy by having fair elections in which legally eligible people can vote, where legal votes (and only legal votes) are counted. We actually *want* the same thing, we just disagree with the best way to get there, when presented with only choice A and choice B. Perhaps choice C is better. Perhaps if either group had better information, they'd realize that A or B actually works well - that their fears are unfounded.
* For those that fear having ID to vote is racist, I really appreciate your concern. I know you absolutely come from a place of the best of intentions. Here's some information you may not have been aware regarding why some of the things said about that are deeply offensive to me and my family:
https://youtu.be/rrBxZGWCdgs [youtu.be]
Re:Maybe you did the impossible (not what they wan (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of what you say is reasonable. You can phrase it another way: systems always have two complementary types of error (known as "type I" and "type II" errors). In this case, a Type-I error would be NOT allowing somebody to vote when they SHOULD be allowed to vote, and a type-II error would be ALLOWING somebody to vote when they should NOT be allowed to vote.
For systems in general, methods reduce type-I errors tends to increase type-II errors, and vice versa. For example, if a system is a switch, and a type-I error is "switch does not turn on when I want it to", you can drop that error to zero by soldering a wire to short the switch. This, however, makes type-II errors (switch is on when I don't want it to be) 100%.
The people opposed to more stringent voter ID laws argue that type-II errors (people voting when they shouldn't be allowed to) are so low as to have no effect on elections, while type-I errors (people not allowed to vote even though they are eligible) are common. They show statistics that support their case; for example, a 2007study showing that since 2000, there were only 31 credible allegations of in-person voting fraud during a period of time in which over 1 billion ballots were cast. (reference: https://www.brennancenter.org/... [brennancenter.org] ). On the other hand, the people arguing for more stringent voter ID laws rarely if ever show statistics, they just say "we can't be sure that there actually is any fraud, but this will stop it."
...* For those that fear having ID to vote is racist, I really appreciate your concern. I know you absolutely come from a place of the best of intentions...
And,here's some information you may not have been aware of regarding how a law can have racist effect without actually being explicitly racist. For example, a larger fraction of blacks are poor than whites. Obtaining ID costs money. Even if ID is offered for free, voters incur costs such as paying for birth certificates to apply for a government-issued ID. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175 (reference; https://www.aclu.org/other/opp... [aclu.org] ) And the travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, and those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation.
And the intent to suppress particular types of voters can often be seen in the laws. For example, Texas allows (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but does not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Your type 1 and type 2 trade-off analysis is correct - in a case so specific that it's not even relevant to the discussion.
That trade-off occurs when the system, the rules, are completely unchanged while you change a parameter value. That is, keeping all the same rules and just changing a number. An example would be how long the grace period is on expired ID. Texas uses four years. A longer period would reject fewer people, resulting in the trade-off.
In a circuit, changing the VALUE of a particular resist
Re: (Score:2)
I was simplifying. Type-I and Type-II errors are complementary. If I had an hour to do the reliability lecture, I would go into series-paralleling (and would point out that sometimes the optimal solution is to pay a little more to buy a better quality switch), but this is a slashdot post.
And you missed the point entirely.
Some people are so caught up in trying to avoid Type-II errors that they massively increase Type-I errors.
Yes, you can plausibly decrease the number of people who vote fraudulently making i
Re: (Score:2)
The more I hear about this, the harder I laugh. Yes, countries are different. Yes, cultures are different. Yes, the whole world is different...
But why is it so hard to get an ID card in the US? I live in fucking Africa, of all places, and everyone here has an ID because they are required by law. highschool kids get an ID when taking the final highschool exam, and those who didnt finish highschool are required to get one anyway. In every country I visit, there is always a single piece of identification that
Click the state web site, it comes in the mail (Score:2)
Generally, we click a few times on the state web site and the new ID comes in the mail. Not hard in the typical case.
On the other hand, if I want four different IDs under four different names of people the state has no record of, that's not going to be as easy. To create brand new people, you have to first get at least a utility bill or some kind of paperwork with the new name on it.
You mentioned when kids graduate school they get an ID.
That works here - bring or send in your school ID or other school reco
Re: (Score:2)
It is basically a straw-man argument backed by 'if you argue with me you are clearly racist'.
If you look at the statement closely, you can see how the claim that voter ID laws are racist is clearly a racist stance(in the literal sense of making judgements about individuals based on their race), but it is in the 'approved' category, and therefore anyone who argues against it or tries to point out how racist it is, gets called racist themselves.
It is very similar to the argument 'I am not a misogynist because
Re: (Score:2)
I skimmed over a list of a few hundred convictions for voter fraud and that supports what you said - it's via mail-in ballots much more often than in-person. I guess people commiting fraud think absentee is the way to do it.
Fraud on petitions to get in the ballot is also much more frequent than getting caught and convicted for fraudulently voting in person.
I did notice an election in which the number of fraudulent votes was enough that it swung the election.
I clicked on your first link, to an advocacy organ
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I'd have preferred not to use links from advocacy organizations, but sometimes that's the best of what's available.
I appreciate those concerns (Score:2)
I forgot to say, I appreciate that you've thought about people who may not have a birth certificate, people without transportation, etc. I'm glad you think about people other than yourself. I would probably be more concerned too, if I didn't know that none of those people are required to show photo ID.
What I don't appreciate as much, although I understand they have good intentions, are when people say things condescending snobbish things like "a lot of black people don't know how to get an ID", or "a lot o
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to say, I appreciate that you've thought about people who may not have a birth certificate, people without transportation, etc. I'm glad you think about people other than yourself. I would probably be more concerned too, if I didn't know that none of those people are required to show photo ID.
Well, you should go thank the ACLU, [aclu.org] then.
Re:Maybe you did the impossible (not what they wan (Score:4, Informative)
FYI, none of the groups of people you mentioned are required to show photo ID to vote in Texas.
... And do you know why that is?
Because the ACLU sued the State of Texas, and the federal appeals court ruled that the restriction in types of ID discriminated against blacks and hispanics... and that it had been intentionally designed to do so.
https://www.npr.org/sections/t... [npr.org]
https://www.chicagotribune.com... [chicagotribune.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So now that you know what the Texas law actually is, you're going to stop going around saying all the stuff you said in your first post, right? You now know it's all false, if you didn't know that before.
I'm sure you wouldn't go around intentionally spreading lies.
Re: (Score:2)
No edit function in Slashdot, I'm afraid.
Strike "For example, Texas allows (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but does not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
Substitute "For example, Texas allowed (state issued) concealed weapons permits to be used as ID for voting, but did not accept (state issued) student photo-ID cards or even state employee photo IDs. Why is that?"
And add: "according to a federal judge, this was
Re: (Score:2)
That's because US citizenship is a requirement for voting. According to https://txapps.texas.gov/txapp... [texas.gov], you need to be a US citizen to have a Texas concealed weapons permit and not be a criminal. There are no such requirements for obtaining a student ID. Therefore having a valid Texas concealed weapons permit means you are a lawful citizen and therefore eligible to vote. A student ID proves nothing relevant to proving you're eligible to vote. Don't be so obtuse.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that's technically correct if you want to be Clintonesqe, to be as misleading as possible without *technically lying*.
An honest statement would be that people need to have *something* with their address on it, such as a utility bill, driver's license, welfare check statement, car registration, inmate ID, etc. If a student ID doesn't have your address, it doesn't qualify by itself.
And no address (Score:2)
I suspect the bigger issue is the one I mentioned - a student ID doesn't have your address on it. Meaning it doesn't indicate which county and school district you're eligible to vote for.
The law is you need something with your address on it, such as a utility bill, W-2, or state ID.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that's technically correct
"Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
Texas had put in laws for rigorous voter ID with the intent, not to reduce fraud (no evidence was given that fraud existd) but to suppress voting by blacks and hispanics. The laws were overturned by the courts after a lawsuit, in which the judge ruled that the law wasn't accidentally discriminating against blacks and hispanics, that it had been written with that as a deli
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect the bigger issue is the one I mentioned - a student ID doesn't have your address on it. Meaning it doesn't indicate which county and school district you're eligible to vote for.
From Votetexas.gov FAQ:
Re: (Score:2)
Makes sense. It does say specifically any government document of any kind *that has your name and address on it*.
It's disengious, I think, to rather than honestly tell people what the rule is, instead twist to make it sound like there's something nefarious. Yeah a carry license is one example of a document that has your name and address. The rule is - name and address.
Re: (Score:2)
> "Technically correct" is an alternate way to say "you're right." Or, to quote Futurama, "technically correct is the best kind of correct".
If you idolize the sneakiness of "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" politicians and want to be just as dishonest as they are, I guess you can do that.
For myself, I hold myself to a standard slightly higher than that.
I try to be honest.
You can decide for yourself what kind of person you want to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me repeat this over and over again, since you do not seem to be paying attention.
The federal court ruled that the 2011 Texas voting ID laws had the effect of suppressing minority voting, and this effect was not coincidental, but that the laws had been written by the legislature of Texas with that specific purpose. The court decision is here: https://static.texastribune.or... [texastribune.org]
This was not an attempt to prevent fraud.
Here's the analysis from Veasey v. Abbott (5th Cir. 2016):
"In an analysis of Texas voters
Re: (Score:2)
> Let me repeat this over and over again
Yeah I've noticed you've been spamming that over and over.
I have no idea why.
Now that I think about it, it does seem like at any mention of integrity you've spammed that crap yet again. I guess to try to change the subject. Talking about personal integrity makes you uncomfortable?
You don't have to talk about it. Like I said, it's up to you whether you want to do the "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" thing and be as misleading as possible, or if you want
Re: (Score:2)
Both groups really want fair elections.
Has it ever occurred to you that there is a sub-group that actually wants to cheat during elections? And they oppose stricter voting security simply because they want to make it easier to cheat?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh absolutely. Not the majority of the voters, though.
Absolutely some elected officials want people to vote for them or their party illegally.
*IF* voters are informed and interested, they can tell the politicians what to do. I think most voters have honorable intentions. If voters are interested but not well informed, they tend to support whatever their political leaders say they should support. That's not good.
Re: (Score:2)
* For those that fear having ID to vote is racist, I really appreciate your concern. I know you absolutely come from a place of the best of intentions. Here's some information you may not have been aware regarding why some of the things said about that are deeply offensive to me and my family:
https://youtu.be/rrBxZGWCdgs [youtu.be]
Those are some 'awesome' post-hoc rationalisations in the first half of that video. Unfortunately I think you just overloaded my irony meter.
If I were to have any concerns about it I might suggest that perhaps a certain cherry picking from within the groups being contrasted took place, but clearly that doesn't nullify the point you're making.
Oh, and thanks.
Re: Maybe you did the impossible (not what they wa (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Thank you. I have to be careful not to give the wrong impression "the other way", I guess you could say.
Although I understand they have good intentions, it gets my blood boiling when people say condescending snobbish things like "a lot of black people don't know how to get an ID", or "a lot of black people don't have an ID or birth certificate" or when it's pointed out you can get the ID for free online "they might not know how to use the internet". That patronizing, condescending attitude sets me off. I w
Re: Maybe you did the impossible (not what they w (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah this is my brain break from working on these f*+&! buffer overflows that just aren't working. How the h+$& does it setfault in a nop sled!?
In other words, my hacks are working the last couple days and it's frustrating as heck. So Slashdot is my 5 minute break every couple hours. :)
* not working (Score:2)
That should say "not working".
Btw, fuck assembly language. And fuck Intel and fuck this class.
Re: * not working (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> "brain break from not working"...
Don't tell my boss; sometimes I take break from it working too. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Although I understand they have good intentions, it gets my blood boiling when people say condescending snobbish things like "a lot of black people don't know how to get an ID", or "a lot of black people don't have an ID or birth certificate" or when it's pointed out you can get the ID for free online "they might not know how to use the internet". That patronizing, condescending attitude sets me off. I want to scream "black people are not your pets!".
Such efforts aren't for you. They're also not for my neighbor up the street who drives a Jaguar. Skinny guy, not too tall, so not a sportsball type. Probably a corporate attorney, judging by his suits. I don't know, I've never spoken to him. He lives in the subdivision with the houses that start at half a million dollars and I live in a subdivision three rungs below that. They're also not for my friend in New York City who married a neurobiologist, speaks three languages, and hit a six figure salary a
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with this plan is, that once you can check your vote afterwards, then someone else, say, your boss or your spouse, can pressure you to show it to them as well, to make sure you voted "the right way". That way, election fraud (albeit in another form) would become almost a certainty.
Re: (Score:2)
I have often seen the argument against public knowledge of how one voted because of the concept of vote buying. The simple solution is to expressly make that activity illegal. Those caught offering people goods, services or money for their voting a certain way will face felony charges.
Which is worse, vote manipulation that we can provide a deterrent to? Or vote manipulation that is hidden in code.
My personal opinion: The entire electronic voting system needs to be open source, both hardware and software
Re: Still waiting (Score:2)
Tell you what, it will be quite dramatic when random hackers can silently, invisibly, dial into the machines in polling stations during an election.
Maybe not plane falling out of the sky dramatic, but dramatic.
Are they banned from Internet connections? (Score:3)
I mean, sure, it sounds bad, but are they banned from connecting to the Internet at all? The headline used "wireless modems" but I'm unclear if that means like cellular Internet or just WiFi. If the machines are networked together, even if in a local non-Internet connected wired network, that network already offers a possible intrusion point since by definition you have to allow outsiders physical access to the machines and the area voting is happening in.
The exact architecture varies by state, by my understanding is that for most voting machines, the current process is that the voting machines tabulate results onto removable media, that media is then loaded onto Internet-connected computers, which then uploads the final results to a server. Over the Internet.
So they're already effectively Internet-connected anyway.
Really we should just be using paper ballots, but for some reason, we've been sold on the idea that marking paper is "too complicated" and confusing for people to do.
Re:Are they banned from Internet connections? (Score:5, Insightful)
The last sentence of the OP makes all the sense: Paper ballots that can be physically audited. Electronic tallying methods work invisibly and can never be above suspicion; they will be an endless source of conflict. Hanging chads are nothing compared to the ephemeral and untrustworthy nature of electronic vote recording. (Yes, blockchain. Never mind that).
Re: (Score:2)
printing out a receipt after voting should be mandatory. That receipt is then placed in a sealed box so that the vote can be audited at a later date.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Are they banned from Internet connections? (Score:2)
Then what vale is the voting machine beyond printing paper ballots?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in Georgia. It's done like that, but the paper ballots are scanned on the spot (by different machines) so that the paper ballot and Dominion machines counts can be verified before the results are reported.
This is how the in-person voting (and early voting) goes in Georgia. We used Dominion voting machines in 2020
First, outside the polling place you show your ID into and fill out a paper sheet with your name, address, date and signature. It has some pre-printed location information. This is a paper reco
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The percentage of rejected/spoiled hand-marked ballots is sometimes greater than the margin of victory in close races. This guarantees accusations of fraud.
It's a huge problem with absentee ballots. Hand marked ballots places election officials in the postition of guessing the voter's intent, which is a bad thing if you don't trust the local officials.
Having the machine print the ballot eliminates spoiled ballots for such things as over-voting where the voter checks both Trump and Biden. That is more common
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Absentee ballots are on paper by definition, no? And so they essentially follow the FL model - scanned mark-sense cards, and the cards are stored for eyeballing later in case of dispute. Unless you create a system that lets people print their vote (sort of like a fillable PDF) the legibility issues are going to be unavoidable for absentee ballots.
Yes, but pretty much everyone in the U.S. has gotten pretty good at filling in little circles, ovals, or boxes to mark their selections. There are always a few edge cases that either have too light a marking or multiple markings. Those can always be diverted for manual review as you stated.
There are multiple states that use mail-in ballots for ALL elections - Hawai'i, Washington, Oregon, Utah, Colorado. They have already created methods for voter registration, change of address, in-person voting for mi
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I should have said validity checking, or something of the kind. An earlier poster was mentioning "what happens if someone bubbles in a mark for every candidate" or the like.
Re: (Score:2)
Then what vale is the voting machine beyond printing paper ballots?
Eliminating "hanging chads" and making it so that they do not have to print a separate ballot for each town in the state (which is what NY does around me, each polling place gets a different ballot (as it has town, county, state and national races on it)).
Aaron Z
Re: (Score:2)
The dipshits making this stuff can't figure out basic concepts like end-to-end encryption or VPNs.
Because it's well known that malware distributed using encryption isn't malware, and if you distribute malware over a VPN it won't work.
and nobody has ever figured out how to turn off encryption.
(uh, in case that isn't obvious: that was sarcasm).
Meet the new boss... (Score:2)
Same as the old boss.
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
Touchscreen to fill out the ballot (Score:2)
And then print out a paper ballot that the voter drops the ballot in the bin. Doesn't leave a lot of room for malicious hackers.
The only downside is the flakiness of printers, but a voting machine without a paper trail is kinda useless.
Re: (Score:3)
Doesn't leave a lot of room for malicious hackers.
You can still send the election observers home at night and then keep counting ballots.
Re: Touchscreen to fill out the ballot (Score:2)
IF he drops it in there.
And not in a trashcan with "drop yoir vote here" taped over it.
More expesive hardware? (Score:2)
The ban on wireless hardware in voting machines would force vendors who currently build systems with off-the-shelf components to rely on more expensive custom-built hardware
Surely there are off the shelf computers and motherboards that don't have Wifi, Blutetooth, or cellular modems (or that have them, but are socketed and can be removed). For wifi and cellular, the antenna connectors could be required to be grounded or attenuated.
To me the requirement should be that wireless networking must be not present or physically disabled so that a software change (hack) can't turn it back on.
This of course assumes that voting machines that do anything beyond helping a voter produce a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: More expesive hardware? (Score:2)
We have hundreds of thousands of voting machines in the US, at that qty you order custom motherboards with exactly what you need and nothing else - drop WiFi, no Bluetooth, no pci express slots, etc.
"Fortifying" our elections! Riiiight? (Score:3)
https://time.com/5936036/secre... [time.com]
It's about time to tell these people "Fuck No" and make it stick.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> There was no fraud, don't be paranoid.
> There was no fraud in significant numbers.
> There was no widespread fraud.
> There was fraud but that's a good thing. [ WE ARE HERE ]
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any ACTUAL evidence?
Of course not.
Re: (Score:2)
It is very difficult to audit election results in states that do not exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you trying to back-handedly say that no poll watchers were denied entrance?
Or that they were purposefully put at a distance from counters so they couldn't do their job?
Or that they were deceived into leaving, only for counting to continue?
Or that poll watchers weren't ejected?
Sorry, all of this happened.
Whether it was "widespread" or not is irrelevant.
It happened.
And it happened in an extremely tight race.
Paper is king (Score:3)
My township finally converted to marked paper ballots prior to the past election. I was pleasantly surprised when I showed up and was given a walk through of marking the bubbles and how to scan the completed ballot.
I had been arguing for a verifiable paper trail for years, and most especially after the 2016 election. With all the shenanigans that go on in certain states (*cough*Georgia [cbsnews.com]*cough*), having a verifiable paper trail which can be cross-referenced against what the machine recorded is the only true way to be sure votes are correctly being counted
To have any ability to manipulate a machine without someone being physically present is insane. There shouldn't even be a discussion on this matter.
Re: Paper is king (Score:2)
How the hell are paper sheets secure?
I can throw them in the thrash, I can print a few of my own, it's incredibly trivial to hack.
Re: (Score:2)
How the hell are paper sheets secure?
I can throw them in the thrash, I can print a few of my own, it's incredibly trivial to hack.
Since each sheet has its own bar code and number at the bottom, if they are thrown out and a recount is done, there won't be any matching. You'll know immediately if someone tampered with the ballots.
Depends on how you treat the modem. (Score:2)
If your main system only communicates to the modem with a very simple protocol with no DMA or anything, and the main system always end-to-end encrypts everything with a VPN tunnell for the target system, before sending it to the modem for transmision, and there is a way to make sure no input can ever get lost (e.g. via a local storage and a protocol to verify correct transmission), then I don't see how the medium the modem uses matters. It could be punched hole tape via pigeon, for all I know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, we know that if the software only allows legitimate use of the built-in modem, there is no possible way a black hat could change that.
No programmers ever leave any errors in their code that might be exploited to escalate privilege or anything, because that can't happen in the 21st century, because all software is secure.
;s
Convenience over Security (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's one thing I really like about working in the cybersecurity department; if I argue to the non-technical people that there's a security vulnerability in what they're doing, they have no choice but to listen, especially because I get to draft some of the policy documents that they're ultimately required to follow.
Re: (Score:2)
You get listened to only if the bosses are likely to be held responsible themselves. Your experience will be indicative of this.
SolarWinds (Score:2)
This is an opportunity for reconciliation (Score:2)
The comment about hurting competition is idiotic. That Hovland guy should be fired. Almost every computer available today is more than capable of managing the 1 every 5 minutes max transaction load of a voting machine.
I bet most of the nerds here with computer experience think banning wireless access hardware is deeply sensible.
There should be a physical record that the voter can confirm.
There should be an efficient way of tallying physical votes at a voting station
Each party should oversee a vote count a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: This is an opportunity for reconciliation (Score:2)
Yes, perhaps we could simply implement a poll tax, to pay for the counting of ballots - in certain no one would have a problem with that.
BTW - gas station attendant wages are paid at the pump by the consumer, not the 'state'.
Re: This is an opportunity for reconciliation (Score:2)
Florida had results in a few hours, proving it can be done, and as far as I know, their results remain unchallenged.
Gee, what could go wrong? (Score:2)
Why not have air gapped voting machines with dual removable certified drives with signatures along with a hardcopy checked by the voter. When the polls close they are picked up by separate people and merged on a single device per municipality that sends its vote count to its pa
Re: (Score:2)
Why not have air gapped voting machines with dual removable certified drives
Because the voting machine vendors are motivated to use the cheapest commodity motherboards. With soldered in SSDs, memory, WiFi hardware, etc. Or risk losing the bid for thousands of machines to some other vendor who does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The cheapest possible solution is a microcontroller
Yeah. But one mounted on a board with memory and peripherals. And produced by the millions to get a volume discount. Sure, you can commission a custom board with just the pieces you want. But it's going to cost a lot more than an RPi that comes with WiFi and BlueTooth.
No problem as long as... (Score:2)
Because, you know... (Score:2)
The U.S. agency overseeing elections has "quietly weakened a key element of proposed security standards..." reports the Associated Press, "raising concern among voting-integrity experts that many such systems will remain vulnerable to hacking."
I'm certain they have very good reasons for allowing people to access voting machine remotely during an election.
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is poised to approve its first new security standards in 15 years after an arduous process involving multiple technical and elections community bodies and open hearings.
Because, you know, technology has hardly changed since 2006.
Australia’s System (Score:2)
Mandatory Voting
Election process managed federally so rules are the same everywhere.
Paper ballots only
Each voting place has a roll of voters where your name is marked off the roll (prevents double voting as rolls are scanned and cross referenced)
In 30 years of voting I’ve never waited more than 5minutes.
Votes must be counted in the presence of scrutinisers and are almost always counted same day as vote.
Simple, fast, cost effective, hard to manipulate.
What is an optional ban? (Score:2)
If something is banned, it is banned. If the ban is optional, then there is no ban.
Vote by text (Score:2)
When are they gonna let me vote by text?
It's not a ban if it's optional... (Score:2)
Re: Virtual Voting ! We'll just phone it in for y (Score:2)
Wouldn't voting electronically, with a P2P broadcast system allow *everyone* to count and verify all votes?
With an ID token that can't be traced back to you, and is changed for each election, anonymity would not be a problem.
And if you'd receive more votes than there are people or IDs issued for your district, you'd know something is wrong.
I'd suggest adding a "none of the above" choice though, so people who refuse to vote because it's all bullshit can be included too, and you can make voting a legal requir
Re: (Score:2)
If nobody had ever invented malware, yes, that might work.
But they did.
Re: (Score:2)
Poof oh look the guy who could not draw a crowd of a dozen people got more votes than any one in history!
You're obviously under the same delusion as the 45th President that rally/crowd size actually means something, or means anything in a larger context.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: appointed by Donald Trump [Re:Have mercy] (Score:2)
Why is that, and when will it change, these arent lifetime appointments...
Re: Hand out ballots em masse (Score:2)
Never fly - absentee ballots can be dropped in any mailbox, in-person voting begins up to 4 weeks before 'election day' and STILL people complain about barriers to voting!