Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 208 posts

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#111

Post by darawk »

runarberg wrote: post #85
darawk wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can film yourself voting now. Vote buying is not a serious problem, and can be readily solved by stiff jail time for attempting it, and large monetary rewards for reporting on people doing it. If you get 10 years in prison for trying to buy votes, and the government offers a standing reward of say, $100,000 for evidence that leads to a conviction, all of the sudden you have to pay substantially more than $100k/vo…

You don’t even need that. In many systems, you can vote multiple times, and only your most recent vote counts. As a buyer you have no way of knowing if your agent didn’t vote after they photographed them self voting for the party you picked.

That's an excellent point, I hadn't thought of that.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#112

Post by emerongi »

dainchi wrote: post #104
EGreg wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really, it strikes me how luddite people are when it comes to voting. In every other case, people welcome technology making stuff easier. But in this area, all I hear is complaints how far the voting booth is, how you need ID, how there is no national holiday and so on. What about absentee ballots? How do you make sure they were mailed by the right person? Listen, if an attacker can subvert 30% of the votes, don’t yo…

I trust the bank because it has zero interest in subverting it’s own security. A government that doesn’t want to be removed from power has both motive and ability to do so. Paper Ballots allow Opposition Parties to count votes, an electronic voting system (wich would require the production of custom hardware in a government–owned facility to be remotely secure) would require the opposition to check for dopant-level c…

The Soviet Union had paper ballots.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#113

Post by [deleted] »

bobthepanda wrote: post #81
oarabbus_ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you hash a signature of some manner to your vote in a manner only the individual can know how they voted? After all this is exactly how login/passwords work.

Then you can extract that information from the voter in the same way you can extract a password; with a blunt object and enough force.

[deleted]

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#114

Post by pilsetnieks »

emerongi wrote: post #112
dainchi wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust the bank because it has zero interest in subverting it’s own security. A government that doesn’t want to be removed from power has both motive and ability to do so. Paper Ballots allow Opposition Parties to count votes, an electronic voting system (wich would require the production of custom hardware in a government–owned facility to be remotely secure) would require the opposition to check for dopant-level c…

The Soviet Union had paper ballots.

You're being facetious and you know it. It wasn't paper ballots that enabled the communists to hold on to power, it's that they didn't have any opposition, and their elections wouldn't be recognized as fair and valid by any modern standard.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#115

Post by emerongi »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #114
emerongi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Soviet Union had paper ballots.

You're being facetious and you know it. It wasn't paper ballots that enabled the communists to hold on to power, it's that they didn't have any opposition, and their elections wouldn't be recognized as fair and valid by any modern standard.

Half-facetious. If a government really wants to hold on to power by force, they can do it one way or another - elections end up being theatre in that case anyways.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#116

Post by yason »

Tankenstein wrote: post #105
deogeo wrote: post #32

"The system has been designed to ensure that voters' computers are not infected by any kind of malware that could change or block their vote." I'm sure this cannot be subverted by an attacker with the resources of USA/China/India/.., or with access to the supply chain from the chip fab onward (don't forget about malware hidden in USB cables!), or or,... And you'd have to be dead sure , because, unlike with physical v…

> there will be few-to-none signs of subversion One thing the Estonian system does is that you can verify your vote on a mobile device by scanning a qr code that you see when you cast the digital vote. A vote can be checked after i-voting for up to three times during half an hour. I imagine if any mismatch was detected the country would shut off i-voting immediately. Further reading: https://www.valimised.ee/en/inter…

You're not supposed to be able to verify votes after the fact because that would enable buying votes.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#117

Post by mamon »

emerongi wrote: post #115
pilsetnieks wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being facetious and you know it. It wasn't paper ballots that enabled the communists to hold on to power, it's that they didn't have any opposition, and their elections wouldn't be recognized as fair and valid by any modern standard.

Half-facetious. If a government really wants to hold on to power by force, they can do it one way or another - elections end up being theatre in that case anyways.

Except in Soviet Union terrorizing all the opposition parties/majority of voters was long, costly and brutal process. Online voting makes the whole thing cheap, easy, and undetectable.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#118

Post by C1sc0cat »

pytester wrote: post #49
HarryHirsch wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When did they stomp out vote-buying in the UK? There is a steady stream of substantiated irregularities around postal ballots (like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/440... , this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/86... , and this: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-lancashire-19397157 ). Postal voting should be restricted to the certifiably homebound, if it's op…

I think 19th century? Not too sure of the exact dates. I do know that it persisted for a while after it was made illegal and then disappeared completely once it actually started being prosecuted. Vote buying could still re-emerge but it can only flourish in an environment where you can do it openly with impunity - i.e. it's legalized or the cops for some reason think they can't touch you. Your first link doesn't appe…

It also became much less cost effective after the franchise was extended - when UK Constituencies had a small number of voters it was more practicable - see the Blackadder episode "Dish and Dishonesty"

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#119

Post by C1sc0cat »

pedrocr wrote: post #40
PrimeDirective wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know they don't change your physical ballots?

Because the count is done by representatives of each party together and each of them won't let the others steal for their side. The characteristics of paper elections are well understood and can be shown to be sound very easily to any common citizen. The massive attack surface of electronic elections is poorly understood even by technical people. It's a massive amount of complexity and expense for exactly zero gain.

I the UK system each party has monitors who observe the count and also get involved in any disputes.

Re: In Estonian parliamentary election, 44% of the votes were cast online

#120

Post by mcv »

deogeo wrote: post #32

"The system has been designed to ensure that voters' computers are not infected by any kind of malware that could change or block their vote." I'm sure this cannot be subverted by an attacker with the resources of USA/China/India/.., or with access to the supply chain from the chip fab onward (don't forget about malware hidden in USB cables!), or or,... And you'd have to be dead sure , because, unlike with physical v…

This is one of the reasons why Netherland has banned voting machines completely. We're back to paper and pencil because it's easy to verify that all votes have been counted.
Post reply on HN