Over the last few years, there has been quite a bit of news about electronic voting machines. Almost all of the press seems to be negative. The media usually highlights security problems.
I am not an experienced programmer by any means, but I am capable of writing code that could perform the task of a voting machine. I realize that this isn’t the big issue, but I still don’t understand what can go wrong.
First of all, I am not talking about internet voting, which does have obvious security flaws that would be impossible to eliminate. I am primarily questioning direct-recording electronic voting machines. These are voting machines that electronically get user input and store the vote in computer memory. There is no paper involved. Activists and security experts claim voting fraud can occur if a third party modifies the software. Obviously this can happen, but the risk is no greater than with paper voting.
I think the bigger problem here is that people are still scared of technology and don’t trust it. No matter what kind of voting system is used, there are always going to be methods of modifying the results.
So, do you think that electronic voting machines are safe????
Copyright 2011. Waves was created in WordPress by Obox Themes.
8 Comments on this post
Leave a CommentIts not whether they are safe or not- I view them as pointless.
The way of voting of Canada is the best. Paper ballots also bring a sense of permanence that one does not get with a touch screen or a keyboard.
Comment left on 2.12.2008 by Aiden Wiechula
Electronic voting would be both faster and cheaper. The results would be known instantaneously.
…. ‘a sense of permanence’….wtf? have you gone soft weech?
Comment left on 2.12.2008 by Adrian Corscadden
these are all great points and the main concern was addressed, modification of the software (though not necessarily modification, but the concern for the question, “does this machine do what i expect it to do?”) publication of the source code would be nice but this is still no guarantee that the software running on the machine records the users input correctly.
generally fraud is always a possibility, and accepting this shows an inherent lack of trust in others (a mistrust i completely share). this is the real problem: the idea that this lack of trust is founded. how civilized is a society that breeds mistrust in our fellow humans?
oh yeah, voting machines… yeah cheaper and faster, but i say easier to manipulate. only takes one programmer to fix an electronic election…
Comment left on 2.12.2008 by MII
Totally man- the four times I’ve voted- making that little x mark feels like a big accomplishment and then you hand it to the electoral officer and pyiscally see it go into the box and their is a feeling of completion. All the ballots go and get stored in a big warehouse as well.
Sure I’m bit of a traditionalist when it comes to voting but I feel its the most foolproof way.
Being cheaper is a good point but that would only persude me if we were having alot more elections (which I have no problem with).
Faster doesn’t really matter- In Canada we know full results 2-3 hours after the polls close in BC. It doesn’t have to be any faster then that and people dont want it to be any faster. There is always publication bans on the Altantic results until polls in BC have closed. And there is never going to be a running tally on the internet.
Comment left on 2.13.2008 by Aiden Wiechula
The main problem with electronic voting is not that it is any easier to manipulate the system but that if the system is manipulated, it is easier to had any traces of the manipulation.
At the moment Orange County, California has electronic voting machines with a paper backup. That way if there is a question, the paper can be checked. In fact, the paper scrolls through a window that the voter can see so the voter can be assured that his/her vote was recorded correctly.
I favor electronic voting but, having spent 13 years in IT security, I just know too many ways of messing with the system. I like the paper backup to bridge the gap between paper, hand or scanner counted, ballots and purely electronic voting.
Comment left on 2.13.2008 by Jeff Miller
I have been a computer professional for over 14 years. I always choose paper.
Comment left on 2.13.2008 by kexbrown
I have to agree with Aiden and the IT people on here, computer voting is a scary prospect, and is much harder to trace when something goes wrong. Check out this documentary, it’s long but well done and shows many of the problems with e-votes: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4463776866669054201
It’s called “Hacking Democracy” and they also have a version of it on You Tube that is split into parts.
Comment left on 2.14.2008 by TS
Hi,
while most people rejects the idea of e-voting, and are more comfortable seeing a piece of paper being put into ballot boxes, e-voting would be practical if security issues are addressed.
Perhaps the traditional voting and e-voting can be combined, have you heard RFID-chip-embedded paper nowadays? Voters tick, the ballot boxes have OMR and RFID encodes the results. instant results, more security. Voters must also have RFID cars (be it voters, citizen ID, etc).
The whole idea is to make it transparent, reliable, secure and quick.
Comment left on 2.18.2008 by Jenz Iggo