Live data from Hacker News

Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

engineering.stanford.edu

91–100 of 316 posts

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#91
Just a reminder: democracy is not a panacea. In fact, the founders of the U.S. were all very concerned about democracies. Democracies inevitably lead to mob rule and chaos. That's why we created a representative republic.

We resolved that by creating a layered system, where small, local groups have frequent elections for things that have great power over their lives, and up the chain we elect national representatives much more infrequently to handle big picture things with little impact on daily lives. We also created a senate at all the levels, which is responsible for the architecture of the system itself (which is why we had the state political parties choose senators. Likewise, using this same theory, you would have local governments choose state senators).

Didn't work out that way, but that was the solution implemented at the founding of the U.S. Worked okay for several decades. But nobody wanted a democracy. In many ways that's worse than a single-person dictatorship.

So regardless of the technical issues, democracy itself is fraught with problems, even in groups as small as 100-200. Unless those problems are acknowledged and dealt with, the "online" part won't matter one way or another.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#93
post #12

The biggest problem with online/computerised voting is that it is a single point of attack for malicious actors. Even the best software security gets broken from time to time, online voting would allow zero-day attacks on elections - an absolute disaster. Whilst standard paper voting may also be subject to fraud, it takes the manipulation of thousands of people in order to alter ballots across a whole country. Comput…

My biggest worry isn't about software security. My worry about online remote voting is What is to stop physical coercion of the voter? When you have to gather at a centralised polling point to anonymously vote you can be damn sure no one is standing over the voter's shoulder twisting their arm while they vote. If you are voting remotely via a computer screen who is to know?

Physical coercion is possible also with paper ballots. A modern approach is to ask voters to shoot a picture to their voted ballot. No picture, big trouble.

For that reason taking a picture of our own voted ballot is a crime in Italy. Obviously is a crime also to ask people to do that. Cameras are not allowed in polling places and smartphones should be left outside the polling booth. However nobody asked me to do that the last time I voted. I remember they did many years ago. There were many phones lined up on the desk of the president of the polling place.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any solution where I can verify my vote, but someone can't coerce me into showing them?

Yes, with end-to-end voting you can be certain that your vote wasn't modified but you can't prove to someone whom you voted for https://www.cs.jhu.edu/~sdoshi/index_files/randomness_paper.... Using interactive proofs you can know that the machine won't modify your vote, and using zero-knowledge proofs plus a distributed key you can decrypt and randomize, being certain that votes haven't been lost and without revealin…

Well we already have mail-in voting and coercion could happen at some shadier physical locations.

Would it be possible to add another vote that invalidates the first, but preserves anonymity? Then there's no guarantee that someone doesn't just revote.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#95
post #19
post #12

The biggest problem with online/computerised voting is that it is a single point of attack for malicious actors. Even the best software security gets broken from time to time, online voting would allow zero-day attacks on elections - an absolute disaster. Whilst standard paper voting may also be subject to fraud, it takes the manipulation of thousands of people in order to alter ballots across a whole country. Comput…

You're choosing a suboptimal attack spot in your paper voting attack scenario. Instead of manipulating the thousands of people around the country who count & send out the results of those booths, it's easier to manipulate the far fewer people who do the aggregation for final results. Also a computer voting system that is exploitable via "one hack" is inexcusably badly designed. Yes hacks happen & adversaries have zer…

> [...] it's easier to manipulate the far fewer people who do the aggregation for final results.

That problem can easily be solved with transparency. In Germany I can do my own tally of the election results as every state reports the votes down the individual polling station. For example, here are the results for Berlin from the last Bundestags election: https://www.wahlen-berlin.de/wahlen/BU2013/ErgebWahllokale/w...

I can also observe the count at my local polling station. They are required to announce their results orally after they're done counting and I can confirm that this is the result reported online.

I've been an election helper and I've always checked that the results online match those that we reported. I never did my own tally, but if the results are close I'm sure someone does them.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#96
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are big opportunities here for the extension of democracy. Democracy as it stands is quite weak - technically a Polyarchy, meaning that elected officials make decisions which we ratify. This could mean citizens could participate in decision making. The same reason is why the government and many people will try to oppose it, because greater democracy is a threat to any power system. The reason why people…

Do you really want citizens participating though? I have no clue about what it takes to run a state and I'm not a lawyer and can't really read new laws. Also, I have a job and very limited free time that I don't want to spent on keeping up with new developments in politics. So my opinions are likely very biased and quite useless for the political process. Even elected officials seem to have a hard time reading all th…

I think this issue could be overcome by a proxy/delegate style system. With the ability to change proxy/delegate at any time, we would have ongoing accountability and move away from the problems of election cycles. Even better from a representation viewpoint (but more complex from a design viewpoint) is the option to have different proxies/delegates for different decisions/topics.

The real problem is balancing tradeoffs, particularly between spending and taxes. Currently (in Australia at least) the size of the expected budget defecit is a crude metric for the overall financial responsibility of the government and is a factor in elections. If citizens can vote independently for spending versus taxes, then there is nobody to hold accountable (tragedy of the commons).

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#97

Terrifyingly, Estonia thinks it is such a good idea they use it in national elections. A good look at potential problems with their system is here: https://estoniaevoting.org/

Here is a response to this "independent" report: https://www.ria.ee/en/e-voting-is-too-secure.html

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#98
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My biggest worry isn't about software security. My worry about online remote voting is What is to stop physical coercion of the voter? When you have to gather at a centralised polling point to anonymously vote you can be damn sure no one is standing over the voter's shoulder twisting their arm while they vote. If you are voting remotely via a computer screen who is to know?

Physical coercion is possible also with paper ballots. A modern approach is to ask voters to shoot a picture to their voted ballot. No picture, big trouble. For that reason taking a picture of our own voted ballot is a crime in Italy. Obviously is a crime also to ask people to do that. Cameras are not allowed in polling places and smartphones should be left outside the polling booth. However nobody asked me to do tha…

Not a fool proof system but a little helpful: In Germany you can request a second (and a third, and a fourth...) ballot.

So fill out the first with fake vote, take picture, ask for second (first one is destroyed), fill out second with desired vote.

This obviously breaks down when the person coercing you is with you in the polling station.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#99
post #2

I have a way to make it better. I think combining old-fashioned checks and balances, with technology controls can make online voting about as secure as it is today (maybe more) and anonymous. To make it anonymous, its really just a password. When a user registers to vote, they create an online account. On the days that a user votes, they log into their account and create a ballot. They then create a password for the…

There's an important property of democratic voting that you're missing: Not only Computer Science PhDs with cryptography experience should be sure their votes aren't manipulated, everyone needs to be.

That's much easier with physical systems.

Re: Why Online Voting Is a Danger to Democracy

#100
post #75

I'm strongly against online voting. The problem #1 is buying and manipulation of votes. Security and/or anonymity is much smaller issue IMO. In my country, barely 50% of people vote. Most people don't care about politics. "Incentivized" votes is a huge issue there. People are routinely brought to polling stations and given a thank-you beer on return. Agitators are using all kind of borderline-blackmailing techniques…

I think there are big opportunities here for the extension of democracy. Democracy as it stands is quite weak - technically a Polyarchy, meaning that elected officials make decisions which we ratify. This could mean citizens could participate in decision making. The same reason is why the government and many people will try to oppose it, because greater democracy is a threat to any power system. The reason why people…

I'm not sure if I'm reading your comment correctly. I totally agree we should aim towards educated and politically active society. However, educated bit should come first. Then we can start making it easier to participate. Tiering the barrier of coming to polling place won't educate people by itself.
Post reply on HN