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

Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 72 posts

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#11

Post by School-Cotton »

jlgaddis wrote: post #9
School-Cotton wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah sure there are some rube goldberg schemes you can concoct like printing a hard copy or whatever, where electronic voting might be secure. But... why? What is the point of adding all this complexity? What problem is electronic voting solving?

Sorry, after posting my comment, I went back and elaborated a bit and just so happened to address the questions you asked in the meantime.

> Logistically, electronic voting with a paper audit trail would be much easier,

Putting a piece of paper in a box is something everyone understands how to do, even elderly people who have never touched a computer -- how is electronic voting easier?

> would require fewer people (i.e., election workers -- who are already in short supply)

They are? I can't believe it would be more expensive to hire a few more election workers for one day than we're paying for these machines.

> would give us results much quicker,

France uses paper ballots and results are known within hours.

> and would be easier to verify/authenticate later (in the event of disputes).

This is not realistic. We are never going to go back and change an election result whether or not records of the votes were saved. Cf. Florida 2000.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#12

Post by QAPereo »

stenius wrote: post #4
irishasaurus wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paper receipts are crucial to voting.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

The receipt could be hashed, but I agree that these machines are a bad idea either way.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#13

Post by stenius »

jlgaddis wrote: post #10
stenius wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

> I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I don't think you should leave without (at least seeing ) proof that your votes were properly and accurately recorded. If that means that you have to be given a "receipt" with the names of those you voted for on it, well, so be it. It isn't like your name and/or any other personally identifiable information would be on it -- just the minimal detail…

That doesn't solve my concern. If your boss at work tells you to go vote and then demands you show your receipt when you get back it wont matter that your name isn't on it. You would be pressure to vote how they told you to.

The proof would be a paper ballot that you turn in. Your actual vote.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#14

Post by gruez »

QAPereo wrote: post #12
stenius wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

The receipt could be hashed, but I agree that these machines are a bad idea either way.

not sure how that helps. if you can verify the hash, it means the baddies can verify the hash as well, which means they can still operate a pay-for-receipts-shows-you-voted-for-our-guy program.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#15

Post by stenius »

School-Cotton wrote: post #11
jlgaddis wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, after posting my comment, I went back and elaborated a bit and just so happened to address the questions you asked in the meantime.

> Logistically, electronic voting with a paper audit trail would be much easier, Putting a piece of paper in a box is something everyone understands how to do, even elderly people who have never touched a computer -- how is electronic voting easier? > would require fewer people (i.e., election workers -- who are already in short supply) They are? I can't believe it would be more expensive to hire a few more election…

Even with electric voting, there are 2 witnesses who's duties are to just watch the election IIRC. FYI: I've done this before and got paid about $10 an hour to do it several years ago while I was in college.

Part of the witness duties should be making sure the votes for that polling location are counted accurately and there is no way to do that with electric voting systems. It's just a black box you have to trust.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#16

Post by space_fountain »

stenius wrote: post #13
jlgaddis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I don't think you should leave without (at least seeing ) proof that your votes were properly and accurately recorded. If that means that you have to be given a "receipt" with the names of those you voted for on it, well, so be it. It isn't like your name and/or any other personally identifiable information would be on it -- just the minimal detail…

That doesn't solve my concern. If your boss at work tells you to go vote and then demands you show your receipt when you get back it wont matter that your name isn't on it. You would be pressure to vote how they told you to. The proof would be a paper ballot that you turn in. Your actual vote.

These machines, generally print out a receipt. Show it to you and store it in a bin so that it can in theory be counted.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#17

Post by jasonjayr »

jlgaddis wrote: post #10
stenius wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

> I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I don't think you should leave without (at least seeing ) proof that your votes were properly and accurately recorded. If that means that you have to be given a "receipt" with the names of those you voted for on it, well, so be it. It isn't like your name and/or any other personally identifiable information would be on it -- just the minimal detail…

In RI --- we mark a paper, and surrender it to the scanner that stores it to a locked box before we exit the polling place.

A printed receipt, from an electronic polling place could just as easily be placed in a secure box prior to leaving.

It's amusing watching "ballot selfies" issue too -- it seems that folks just don't understand how important it is not allowing any coercive force influencing or verifying your vote.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#18

Post by QAPereo »

gruez wrote: post #14
QAPereo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The receipt could be hashed, but I agree that these machines are a bad idea either way.

not sure how that helps. if you can verify the hash, it means the baddies can verify the hash as well, which means they can still operate a pay-for-receipts-shows-you-voted-for-our-guy program.

Don't make it trivial to verify the hash, after all it only needs to come into play if there is an audit.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#19

Post by skybrian »

stenius wrote: post #4
irishasaurus wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paper receipts are crucial to voting.

I don't think you should leave with any proof of who you voted for. I'm worried that it could be used by people to influence elections by paying for receipts from certain candidates or by punishing people who are not able to produce the correct receipt. I think we should return back to paper ballots. When there are witnesses to elections, I don't think any of them are qualified to judge if an election has been done i…

Yes, they don't actually give you a receipt, for this reason.

One way it's done is that after entering your choices on touchscreen, you see the printed receipt through a glass window, and then it's stored so a recount can be done if necessary.

However, an electrically scanned paper ballot seems a lot simpler.

Re: Virginia has decertified its most hackable voting machines

#20

Post by cmrajan »

School-Cotton wrote: post #5

Why the fuck do we need to vote on machines, anyway? I don't understand this. Many other countries use paper ballots, including highly developed ones (e.g., France, UK...)

Voting on the machines per se is not the problem, rather the current system is. In India electronic voting machines are exclusively used for all state and national elections and were kept deliberately non-networked by design.IIRC the technology is being 'exported' to other countries as well. http://www.firstpost.com/india/evm-tampering-why-india-stand...
Post reply on HN