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

Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 501 posts

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#331

Post by Scubabear68 »

jfengel wrote: post #147
_whiteCaps_ wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. In Canada, for federal elections at least, you're assigned to a specific location and station. You can't vote anywhere else. There's a separate process for mail in ballots to confirm you didn't vote in advanced voting or on election day as well.

Same in the US. You can try voting again at other stations, especially since they don't require ID. You just need the name of somebody assigned to that station, who hasn't already voted. There is a signature check if there is a suspicion, but that's rarely done. But that's practically never done. The risks are too high, and to have a significant impact would require enough votes to make it certain you'd get caught.

The signature check is actually not uncommon, particularly if the vote is contested or a recount done.

We had a vote thrown out of an election several years ago, the woman died right after the election, the signature on the card looked nothing like hers and was probably done by her daughter.

That said all indications are voter fraud is not any kind of wide spread problem in the United States.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#332

Post by Muromec »

beAbU wrote: post #321
lobf wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A front of queue, show ID of some sort (various accepted) to volunteer This is explicitly not required, at least last time I volunteered as a polling place worker. You should NEVER be required to show ID to vote, at least in CA.

How do you determine voter eligibility without ID?

The name is on the list, so the person can vote. Why would you need them to show an id for that? You would need to establish the identity first (which everybody would have anyways, should the US not be a bunch of third world countries in a trench coat), but not eligibility.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#333

Post by dmix »

jfengel wrote: post #111
ritzaco wrote: post #12

I don't care how much maths and encryption you use, you can't get out of the fact that things can be anonymous (no one can know how you voted) or verifiable (people can prove that you only voted once) but not both. - Switzerland usually gets around this by knowing where everyone lives and mailing them a piece of paper 'something you have' - South Africa gets around this by putting ink on your fingernail I've read qui…

The USA threads the needle by simply not having verifiable voting. And it turns out it works pretty well. Despite countless hours and lawsuits dedicated to finding people who voted more than once, only a handful of cases have actually turned up. It's not that there are no checks. You have to give your name, and they know if you've voted more than once at that station that day. To vote more than once you'd have to pre…

> Despite countless hours and lawsuits dedicated to finding people who voted more than once, only a handful of cases have actually turned up.

Trust in the system should always be highly valued even if the skepticism is largely unwarranted. Saying a lawsuit hasn't caught it yet won't persuade many skeptics.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#334

Post by Muromec »

lobf wrote: post #320
rayiner wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying we have widespread voter fraud. My gut feeling is that we don’t. But I’m a very trusting person. I always believe people when they ask for money on the street because their car broke down. I don’t know how you can confidently say there isn’t meaningful voter fraud. How would you even verify past elections? You can point to millions spent on commissions and lawyers, but those can’t go back and generate…

I think you need to start with proposing how a person could fraudulently vote. If you show up to the polling place, you need to list the name and address of a registered voter in that district. How do you know this information? If you use a relative or acquaintance whose name and address you know they're registered at, when they show up to vote it will be noted that they have already voted. They can then put in their…

I always wondered (Clearly Not North America) How does one get on a list anyways? I would imagine getting on a list fraudlently leaves paper trail and this would have been discovered in 5 minutes retroactively, but I'm still curious.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#335

Post by hocuspocus »

nemo44x wrote: post #327

Paper ballots work just fine. Why are we using tools for scale (computers) when voting is an incredibly small and finite domain. Just total waste of tax dollars and over engineered solution to a simple problem.

Voting is definitely not a small domain in a direct democracy, and many Swiss citizens abroad don't receive paper ballots early enough to mail them back in time.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#336

Post by lobf »

Muromec wrote: post #334
lobf wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to start with proposing how a person could fraudulently vote. If you show up to the polling place, you need to list the name and address of a registered voter in that district. How do you know this information? If you use a relative or acquaintance whose name and address you know they're registered at, when they show up to vote it will be noted that they have already voted. They can then put in their…

I always wondered (Clearly Not North America) How does one get on a list anyways? I would imagine getting on a list fraudlently leaves paper trail and this would have been discovered in 5 minutes retroactively, but I'm still curious.

When you register to vote, you give your address as well as proof of eligibility to vote. That address is used to assign you a polling place, and also as an additional piece of data needed in order to filter out fakers. Your voting eligibility is checked before being added to the list, which also mitigates fakers.

If you're trying to register in someone else's name, you have to pray that they don't register themselves or show up to the polls to vote. That's a gamble which prevents systematic individual voter fraud.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#337

Post by Muromec »

dirasieb wrote: post #276
macintux wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to imagine the Canadian ID situation is different. Here, simply obtaining a copy of your birth certificate can be a long trip to a different state.

birth certificate is not the only form of ID

How birth certificate is even a form of id? I don't understand.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#338

Post by cge »

HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #324
jfengel wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in Russia, it is. That's why they call it "карусель". In the United States, it hasn't been. The article you link to doesn't even mention the United States. To do it on a large scale requires cooperation from the people running the election, and the US isn't (yet) that corrupt. The US system isn't completely robust against it, and perhaps some day it will be a problem. But right now there is no evidence that it is…

Famously, there have been significant issues in the past (see Tammany Hall) but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as widespread as it used to be, and especially not at the national election level. I’m sure that there’s shady stuff happening in local (county) level elections, but that’s of significantly less importance to the rest of the general public

An added point about Tammany Hall is that for much of time it was a relevant political power, the US did not have secret ballots. Arguably, it was the lack of anonymity/secrecy in voting that allowed for the types of election fraud that Tammany Hall and others were known for.

The secret ballot perhaps made a particular type of election fraud, the kind done by dedicated partisans voting multiple times themselves, theoretically easier. But it removed the mechanics that allowed far more prevalent and lucrative election fraud. In the Tammany Hall era, you could buy votes and know that your paid voters actually voted the way you wanted. You could promise that your preferred candidates, if elected, would give rewards only to people who voted for them, and actually follow through with that promise. You could physically prevent people from voting with ballots that weren't yours, rather than trying to rely on demographics.

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#339

Post by malfist »

lobf wrote: post #316
alistairSH wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The process in my precinct is roughly... - Enter queue - A front of queue, show ID of some sort (various accepted) to volunteer - They scratch you from the list and hand you a paper scantron sheet - Go to private booth, fill out scantron - Go to exit, scan ballot (it scans and then drops into a locked box for manual tally later, if necessary) The "easy" ways to vote fraudulently are also easily caught... fake I…

>A front of queue, show ID of some sort (various accepted) to volunteer This is explicitly not required, at least last time I volunteered as a polling place worker. You should NEVER be required to show ID to vote, at least in CA.

Maybe they weren't in California?

Re: Swiss e-voting pilot can't count 2,048 ballots after decryption failure

#340

Post by Muromec »

lefra wrote: post #280
mkehrt wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting is a civil right. We need to have a system that allows everyone who is allowed to vote, to vote. Many people don't have IDs and it is an onerous process to get one. Any system that requires IDs for voting suppresses these people's civil rights.

There's a trivial solution to this: IDs should be provided by the government for free.

Last time I had to get the ID (sea floor countries in Europe), it was something like a hundred eurobucks, about 20 minutes of my time and two trips to the place during kinda sorta business hours. But then again, I have to use my 3 hour lunch breaks for something besides drinking beer.
Post reply on HN