Voting Machine Flaws Easy To Fix: So Why Aren't They Fixed?

from the just-wondering dept

If you read Techdirt regularly, you should be well aware of the problems concerning electronic voting machines. They’re not secure. They’re easily hackable. There’s usually no verifiable paper trail for a recount. Yet another study has come out listing out all the problems with e-voting machines. That’s not a surprise. However, the report also notes that many of the problems are easily fixable, but e-voting machine providers haven’t bothered and election officials haven’t pushed for the fixes. It’s the same old story. Every time one of these flaws is pointed out, the companies make excuses or jokes, and say there’s nothing at all to worry about. The evidence clearly shows that’s false — and the fact that many (though, not all) of the problems are easily fixable, why won’t the companies make their voting machines more secure? Update: The report also found that it could just take one single hacker to change the outcome of an election.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Voting Machine Flaws Easy To Fix: So Why Aren't They Fixed?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
19 Comments
I, for one says:

doors to open doors

Good question. Why would anybody allow a system used for an important function to have question marks hanging over its reliability?

The only rational answer is, so that the result can be called into question.

We all assume the obvious “conspiracy theory” (sorry I have to call it that to stay on a familiar tone) scenario, in which sinister organisation S , in league with party P1creates backdoors and loopholes in the system Y so that party P1 can can have it’s votes rigged to beat party P2.

Nonsense. That would be blatent fraud.

System Y is full of flaws and backdoors so that when party P2 wins by a legitimate margin, S on the behest of P1 can claim there are irregularities. The pro rigour lobby (that’s us) will be jumping up and down shouting “Told you so. Investigate. Investigate.” Whereupon it turns out (from the easily manufactured and non-deniable evidence trail) that the irregularities favour P2 and the election decision goes to the judge already bought by P1.

Just a conjecture mind you. I don’t think anybody intends to use these back doors. But their presence opens up many other “politically useful” doors.

In simple words, if the process was written in Z and VDM, run through theorem provers, implemented in ADA to the same military specifications that one might write, say a ballistic missile guidance system, published as open source and everyone including the independent computer scientists agreed upon its correctness and invulnerability…. well then nobody could dispute who won the election fair and square this time.

NSMike says:

Stupidly stupid

Interesting that the Diebold spokesperson said something to the effect that this is all hypothetical, hasn’t happened yet, and would be very difficult to accomplish…

That’s almost an acknowledgement that it’s not impossible.

Not to mention the “hasn’t happened yet” attitude is a major lure to those looking for a challenge. “It hasn’t happened yet? Let’s make it happen!”

Franssu says:

The US democracy is ill. Everything is rigged, twisted in favor of big money, so much they don’t even need to hide their actions anymore. Diebold CEO even bragged he would give states to the Bush election. That guy is the head of a voting machine company, and nobody cares.

The US democracy is dying, and nobody’s doing anything. Oh, well, same ol’, it’s the same in other countries (France, Italy, England…) as well, so move on everybody.

Sometimes I Wonder says:

Voting Conspriacy

You know, if all these electronic voting machines were as vunerable as the “experts” say they are, why have they not come out and specified HOW they are vulnerable? If you post the theory, post the proof! If it is so easy to hack a voting machine and “throw” an election, why hasn’t proof been offered that it has happened? We know Microsoft is vulnerable because of the proof of concept exploits that are rampant. Show me the proof of concept on this conspiracy theory about voting machines!!!

And, let’s say there were no electronic voting allowed in this country. Would elections be safe and secure then? I would postulate that in any process where human intervention is required, the process is flawed. Politicians have bought votes for as long as there has been people voting, no matter on what type of device that vote was cast.

All the crap about how insecure electronic voting is doing nothing to make it better. How about doing something positive and being part of the solution rather than part of the probem???

EiderDuck says:

Re: Voting Conspriacy

“why have they not come out and specified HOW they are vulnerable?”

Um… because anybody who posts specific details on their vulnerabilities will immediately get sued.

I assume “Sometimes I Wonder” is a troll from Diebold or a flunky who works for Ohio’s Secretary of State, because nobody else could possibly be stupid enough to make that post.

I, for one says:

Re: Voting Conspriacy

“If it is so easy to hack a voting machine and “throw” an election, why hasn’t proof been offered that it has happened?”

I think there was proof. At least proof of a discrepency. I believe a machine card from the crucial Florida election didn’t tally, which is kinda what set this whole chain of investigation in motion. No link. Anyone back me up here?

“And, let’s say there were no electronic voting allowed in this country. Would elections be safe and secure then?”

No. But they would be safer because they would be more accountable.

“I would postulate that in any process where human intervention is required, the process is flawed.”

You would be correct. Democracy is process that requires human intervention and is flawed. However an imperfect system is better than having an appointed dictator, or so many people believe.

“Politicians have bought votes for as long as there has been people voting, no matter on what type of device that vote was cast. ”

Also true, However in the past it was more difficult. With real people there are witnesses. Only in 3rd world villages can you burst into the polling station with guns and threaten the lives of everybody and their families to silence them. With electronic voting fraud there are no witnesses.

“All the crap about how insecure electronic voting is doing nothing to make it better.”

On what do you base that hypothesis? Do you have no faith in your fellows to act on their knowledge and suspicions? Do you believe that the people of your country are powerless?

“How about doing something positive and being part of the solution rather than part of the probem???”

That’s an empty rhetorical question.

Anonymous Coward says:

they HAVE you retard

there is no doubt in my mind that the last two elections were rigged, making the country use electronic voting machines that are easily backdoorable just made it all the easier..

anyone who steps up to say ‘there could be a problem’ is jailed/sued/ run out of town on a rail and NOTHING is done to fix the problem

the diebold CEO (who quit amid several other indictments) personally garenteed bush the election if he used his machines…

our country was taken over while we were all busy watching fox, and american idol..

imfbsbn says:

One Single [blank]

Talk about hype. Did you also know that one single scientists could build a nuclear bomb? Or cause a blackout, or release ebola?

Can the machines be better? Yes.

But that does not change the fact that since the first vote was cast millennia ago that physical security is the #1 concern against fraud. Anyone with unlimited access to ANY voting machine can cause problems.

TT says:

Hacking machines

I’m advocating the publication of how to hack these machines. If the repubs. know we know how to do it than the security will get in place. Pronto.

Think of it – if only a few people know how to hack these things than we are vulnerable – if we all know something will get done.

It’s one way to fight the neocon terroists!

TT

“I wan my country back”

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...