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

Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

blog.citp.princeton.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 532 posts

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#401

Post by anabab »

somenameforme wrote: post #318
pdpi wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you haven’t lived under a dictatorship. It might not be a sledgehammer, but breaking voter secrecy and pressuring people to vote the “right” way is very much a thing.

In the sort of scenario you're talking about the dictator doesn't care how people vote. 'The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.' If he has such a lack of control that a mere election, which is to be counted fairly, could have him leave power, then it'd be somewhat farcical to declare him a dictator with all the connotations such a term implies.

Yes but no. The looks are also important. They want 80-99% to stroke their ego and nice pictures to claim legitimacy. The latter seemingly being useful both internally and externally.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#402

Post by luxcem »

HaZeust wrote: post #375
bluGill wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vote buying and worse 'vote for me or I'll shoot you'. Buying is the more common scam but there are worse options for evil people

You can also do this today by telling someone to take a picture of their vote by smartphone or you'll shoot them. Millions post a picture of their ballot on high-energy political forums every 2 years already. This hypothetical is unhelpful.

Where I live, ballot are a piece of paper slipped into an envelope (not sealed). It's mandatory to take at least two different ballots before entering a voting booth. You can take a picture with one ballot inside the envelope and switch before leaving the booth.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#403

Post by GJim »

Tagbert wrote: post #257
ggm wrote: post #3

I live in an economy where people vote with pencils on paper in cardboard booths and at scalable cost, it just works. Obviously the cost also has to scale linearly for the 200+m voter economies, and time becomes a factor, but for community acceptance I still think paper and pen/pencil beats machine hands down. (this is Australia. we have compulsory attendance at voting booths for eligible citizens, you can spoil your…

Where I live we vote by mail by filling in little bubbles with a pen. the counting is done by simple photoelectronic tabulators and there is a built-in, human readable record that can be checked by hand. It is very economical and hard to compromise at a scale that has any effect. i hate the idea of using internet voting. I also don’t trust the electronic voting booths where the whole action is virtual or the older me…

> Where I live we vote by mail

The problem with this, like internet voting, is that you can be coerced.

e.g. a family member or your boss can tell you who to vote for and force you to submit that vote.

Whereas a polling both is utterly private; you are alone and free from coercion. Nobody else knows who you voted for and they have no way of telling.

In the UK, our voting is also done by paper and pencil. The votes are counted overnight by humans (with plenty of checks, independent oversight and rights of recounting) with the result typically declared the next day.

Its secure, and it just works.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#404

Post by ggm »

ralph84 wrote: post #361
schmuckonwheels wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Where I live we vote by mail by filling in little bubbles with a pen. >It is very economical and hard to compromise at a scale that has any effect. Vote-by-mail creates unnecessary opportunities for cheating, irregularities, and all sorts of foolishness. If you can fill in the bubbles, you could theoretically fill them in for other people. People living with parents suffering from dementia could fill out their ballo…

Ballot harvesting is viewed as a feature, not a bug, by the people who control vote-by-mail states.

Because they operate in a non good faith model where discouraging voting and gerrymander is normalised. The electoral commission is politicised, not neutral and independent. Because voting is held at times and dates which disadvantage working poor, because voter ID rules are capricious and partisan.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#405

Post by joe_mamba »

ggm wrote: post #404
ralph84 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ballot harvesting is viewed as a feature, not a bug, by the people who control vote-by-mail states.

Because they operate in a non good faith model where discouraging voting and gerrymander is normalised. The electoral commission is politicised, not neutral and independent. Because voting is held at times and dates which disadvantage working poor, because voter ID rules are capricious and partisan.

>because voter ID rules are capricious and partisan.

Can you elaborate?

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#406

Post by GJim »

themafia wrote: post #293
ggm wrote: post #3

I live in an economy where people vote with pencils on paper in cardboard booths and at scalable cost, it just works. Obviously the cost also has to scale linearly for the 200+m voter economies, and time becomes a factor, but for community acceptance I still think paper and pen/pencil beats machine hands down. (this is Australia. we have compulsory attendance at voting booths for eligible citizens, you can spoil your…

> we have compulsory attendance at voting booths for eligible citizens, you can spoil your paper or walk away but we enforce with a fine, participation in the one obligation of citizenship Then my refusal to vote should be counted. If enough people refuse to vote then the entire election should be cancelled and new candidates found. Otherwise this is a ridiculous catch 22 of state bullying to no actual purpose. Who w…

> Then my refusal to vote should be counted.

Then spoil your paper.

Spoiling your paper shows that you got off your arse and voted to say "I don't want any of these people". (See the number of spoilt votes in the UK Police and Crime Commissioner elections for a prime example of this; many in the UK disagreed with politicising the police and spoilt their papers in protest)

By simply not voting, the assumption is you are either lazy or simply don't care...... And as a result, the politicians will not care either.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#407

Post by joe_mamba »

pdpi wrote: post #253
zug_zug wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a weird argument. I've never met anybody with a sledgehammer threatening votes. Feels like a willfully absurd excuse to avoid having an audit trail in elections.

Then you haven’t lived under a dictatorship. It might not be a sledgehammer, but breaking voter secrecy and pressuring people to vote the “right” way is very much a thing.

You don't need a dictatorship to nudge people to vote the "right" way, just incentives for the masses:

  Vote for me and I'll increase your pensions, the other guy wants to decrease your pensions.

  Vote for me and I'll increase wages of gov workers and civil servants, the other guy wants to fire gov workers.

  VOte for me and I'll increase your welfare and give you free* housing.
etc... etc.

The gov has masses of people that depend on the gov's generosity that they can leverage with a carrot on a stick to swing the majority in their favor. You don't need to put a gun to their head. The gun to their head is the threat of losing those government provided perks.

That's how elections are won in Europe, just promise the boomers(largest voter base) higher pensions. That's why nobody who campaigns on reforming the pension system will ever win an election.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#408

Post by GJim »

zwranadikos wrote: post #122

So my internet banking is secure for my funds, but internet voting is not for my vote. Right... OK, we got the message.

Baking and voting have a completely different set of requirements and security risks.

To suggest a direct comparison is idiotic.

Re: Internet voting is insecure and should not be used in public elections

#410

Post by habinero »

somenameforme wrote: post #311
badestrand wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic we have to get rid of mail-in voting as well because there could always be a sledgehammer guy standing next to someone in their own home.

In reality sledgehammer guy is never the threat, it's somebody fabricating votes. This can be done in a completely illegal fashion as in complete identity fraud, legally grey areas like ballot harvesting, or more socially palatable forms of identity fraud like somebody voting on behalf of family members who would not otherwise be voting. And the biggest problem of this all is that it's basically impossible to prove b…

This is 100%, completely absolutely untrue. Stop repeating this propaganda. The system is actually really well designed and safe, I was a poll observer.

You cannot "fabricate" votes, because all mail-in ballots are associated with a voter. Or rather, you put your ballot in an envelope and the envelope is associated with you. When your ballot is received, you are marked as voted and other ballots are invalid. The envelope is stored as proof of who voted and the ballot is kept separately to be tallied.

Ballot counting is done in public (you can go watch!) and there are a lot of safeguards and crosschecks. It's intended to make any fraud very obvious and incredibly difficult to scale.

Post reply on HN