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

CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

cisa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 211 posts

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#161

Post by jkhdigital »

jariel wrote: post #148
motohagiography wrote: post #41

Was there a reason CISA needed to release a statement? I haven't seen anything controversial in the news. As they say, if you have to say it... I have a few comments going back a couple of years predicting how electronic voting will cause civil unrest because it is so vulnerable to being discredited. Edward Snowden even recently tweeted a prof's video about the same thing. Everybody who had given the issue any seriou…

"I haven't seen anything controversial in the news" It's literally on every page of the news. The Trump campaign is trying to discredit the results of the election by any means possible. The issue of 'electronic voting' is only a concern were there to be an election among regular people, interested in determining the actual truth. It's much worse when people in positions of power just make up the truth 'because they…

Don’t forget about the other 20% who will believe anything sourced from an anonymous intelligence official

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#162

Post by TimTheTinker »

Jayschwa wrote: post #135
mapme wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been all over the news in the US of trump claiming voter fraud. Apnews fact check has been full of the debunked claims in the last few days. https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-ap-fact-check-joe-b... https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-election-dead-voter... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-tr... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-us-news-m... https://apnews.c…

Edit: I have removed the link because someone else found errors in it. Original: AP claims there's no evidence of "dead voters", but this list seems to indicate otherwise: [redacted] It's obituaries matched with returned absentee ballots. I've inspected a dozen or so entries and it seems legit.

Very interesting, thanks for that.

I’m curious where you got a link to that. Looks like it’s from an account that was registered only yesterday... so there’s really no evidence (at least on the repo itself) that it’s “crowdsourced”.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#163

Post by MacsHeadroom »

Jayschwa wrote: post #135
mapme wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been all over the news in the US of trump claiming voter fraud. Apnews fact check has been full of the debunked claims in the last few days. https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-ap-fact-check-joe-b... https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-election-dead-voter... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-tr... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-us-news-m... https://apnews.c…

Edit: I have removed the link because someone else found errors in it. Original: AP claims there's no evidence of "dead voters", but this list seems to indicate otherwise: [redacted] It's obituaries matched with returned absentee ballots. I've inspected a dozen or so entries and it seems legit.

I'm not who you replied to. But I saw this get crowdsourced live on Twitter a few days ago.

IIRC the original list was a pastebin with ~8000 identities and this list was the final result after testing each identity individually on a state of Michigan website.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#164

Post by refurb »

ttul wrote: post #105
garyrichardson wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. But local, provincial and national elections are different events. Referendums are occasionally attached. Ballots are almost always one question for provincial and national.

And regardless, all elections are run by a non-partisan agency. Just like the health service, the police service, the fire service, and the garbage service.

Non-partisan? I mean, they are controlled by the elected government, who appoint people to do what they want. With the exception of elected sheriff's in the US, I wouldn't say it's less partisan. Take a look at what's going on in Alberta with the new Conservative gov't. Plenty of "non-partisan" government agencies are raising hell over the new policy direction.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#165

Post by Thorrez »

motohagiography wrote: post #41

Was there a reason CISA needed to release a statement? I haven't seen anything controversial in the news. As they say, if you have to say it... I have a few comments going back a couple of years predicting how electronic voting will cause civil unrest because it is so vulnerable to being discredited. Edward Snowden even recently tweeted a prof's video about the same thing. Everybody who had given the issue any seriou…

6,000 Trump votes in Antrim County, Michigan were erroneously given to Biden for a period of time because a voting machine was configured incorrectly.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/election-security-when...

Trump is advocating the idea that this is actually super super widespread and tons of his votes were given to Biden, not just temporarily, but permanently:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/13269262268885442...

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#166

Post by bobthepanda »

garyrichardson wrote: post #95
bobthepanda wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Canadians also have local and provincial elections and referenda, no?

Yup. But local, provincial and national elections are different events. Referendums are occasionally attached. Ballots are almost always one question for provincial and national.

The argument against this is that generally speaking, US presidential elections are considered the most important, so turnout on any election on “off” years, or even “off” days, is considered a sure way to get less voter turnout. Is this not a pattern observed in Canadian elections?

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#167

Post by bobthepanda »

jkhdigital wrote: post #143
ttul wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And regardless, all elections are run by a non-partisan agency. Just like the health service, the police service, the fire service, and the garbage service.

Why do you keep bringing this up? Do you mean that these services are centralized ? Because elections are indeed run by “non-partisan” (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context) agencies here in the US, but they are not centralized at the federal level.

Nonpartisan would mean not dependent on elected officials declaring a party.

Generally speaking, in most US states the person certifying the election result is the Secretary of State, an elected official elected while affiliated to a party. There was a whole brouhaha when Brian Kemp was running for governor of Georgia while also the Secretary of State, because that looked like a conflict of interest in a hotly contested election.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#168

Post by timmaxw »

Jayschwa wrote: post #135
mapme wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been all over the news in the US of trump claiming voter fraud. Apnews fact check has been full of the debunked claims in the last few days. https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-ap-fact-check-joe-b... https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-election-dead-voter... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-tr... https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-us-news-m... https://apnews.c…

Edit: I have removed the link because someone else found errors in it. Original: AP claims there's no evidence of "dead voters", but this list seems to indicate otherwise: [redacted] It's obituaries matched with returned absentee ballots. I've inspected a dozen or so entries and it seems legit.

These aren't dead voters, they're living voters who happen to have the same name and birth month/year as a dead person.

As evidence: I spot-checked three random entries. In all three cases, I could find a Whitepages.com entry for a person with the same first & last name, in or near the zip code where the ballot was for; but the obituary was for a different city.

Entry 962: The voter is registered in zip code 48602 (Saginaw, MI). Whitepages.com lists a resident of Saginaw, MI with the same name and age as the voter. But the obituary is for someone who lived in Eastpoint, MI, which is 100 miles away. Howmanyofme.com estimates there are 6,000 people in the United States with this same name.

Entry 302: The voter is registered in zip code 48076 (Lanthrup Village, MI). Whitepages.com lists a resident of Southfield, MI (which is a city surrounding Lanthrup Village, MI) with the same name and age as the voter. But the obituary is for someone who lived in Detroit, MI, which is 17 miles away. Howmanyofme.com estimates there are 1,600 peple in the United States with this same name.

Entry 707: The voter is registered in zip code 48162 (Monroe County, MI). Whitepages.com lists a resident of Carleton, MI (a city in Monroe County, MI) with the same name and age as the voter. But the obituary is for someone who lived in Novi, MI, which is 48 miles away. Whitepages.com also lists at least three other individuals in various parts of Michigan with the same name and age range.

I've filed this as an issue on the Github repo: https://github.com/votesunshine/votesunshine.github.io/issue...

It's very irresponsible for you to be spreading these rumors. You should make it right by spreading the truth instead: go back to wherever you found out about this page, and let them know that it's actually just a case of different people with the same name.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#169

Post by 01100011 »

aw1621107 wrote: post #159
jariel wrote: post #134

A possible solution to the electronic/paper issue might be literally just receipts. You vote in a 'machine' and it prints a 2 receipts - one for the 'backup' and one that you keep with some kind of encrypted/encoded data for non-repudiation. You go online with your private receipt number and it can validate your vote. If the electronic count is not accepted, the physical 'receipts' are coded so they can be counted ve…

> You go online with your private receipt number and it can validate your vote. What precisely do you mean by "validate" here? Would this scheme make the ballot non-secret?

If each ballot has a unique ID and there is no association between the person voting and the ID, then the voter can retain that number, possibly by tearing off a section of the ballot as is done in CA, and check that number online to verify their vote was tallied as expected.

Re: CISA: The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history

#170

Post by cycomanic »

jcranmer wrote: post #146
CountSessine wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it still doesn’t answer the question - in Canada we count all the ballots the same day BY HAND. Why is this so hard in the US? The only thing that I can think of is that your elections staff are grossly under-allocated?

Another possible factor is that US elections generally see far more races on the ballot. In my ballot this year, I had to vote for US President, US House, US Senate, State House, State Senate, Councillor, Register of Probate, and three referendums. That's actually a pretty light ballot; in the past, I've also had to vote for races such as County Auditor, Recorder of Deeds, County Clerk, Soil & Water Conservation Dist…

Actually most places I'm aware of count paper ballots. Germany, Sweden, Australia all use paper ballots as far as I'm aware (unless something changed recently) and in all of the countries results are typically in during the night of the election. And many of these countries have also significant option in their votes, I mean Australia's preferential system means you have a lot of choices (if not going with the party preferences).

I think one reason for the US system to be this complex is essentially corruption, i.e. funnelling money to the makers of voting machines. The other reason is that the US system highly encourages parties to try to get votes of the other party discounted based on technicalities.

It still boggles my mind that in the US, the first modern democracy the system developed to discourage voter participation

Post reply on HN