[Cialug] voting think tank comment

[Tom Poe]

Dave J. Hala Jr. offered the following on 09/02/2005 08:56 AM:
> There's been a lot of talk about open source voting. We all know that
> open source and printing a receipt for a voting machine is a no
> brainer.  I think the real issue is getting the voting  machine
> certified.
> 
> The hard part of that is that there are many large players like Diebold
> out there that have been greasing politicians... Like a I said, a paper
> receipt is a no-brainer, but getting it done drags you through the
> tangled mess of our "Great Democracy".
> 
> Even if you had the perfect open source, prints a receipt, works
> flawlessly voting machine, you'd be hard pressed to get it in service
> unless your dad was a senator, your uncle was vice president or you're
> an escort that partied with a Kennedy last night. 
> 
> Just my thoughts...
> 
> :) Dave
> 
> On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 08:39, Jeff Davis wrote:
> 
>>It depends on how accurate and tamper-proof you need it to be.
>>
>>A while back there was thread on one of
>>securityfocus mailing lists on this topic.
>>
>>Some of the problems/issues were:
>>  One of the biggest issues was that if
>>  you have 1 machine running a program that
>>  just displays the ballot and keeps a count
>>  of the votes, there is no paper trail to
>>  verify the results.  There are many scenarios
>>  where a verifiable paper trail is needed.
>>
>>  The software needs to be open source for
>>  several reasons, including ensuring that
>>  the software developers didn't add in any
>>  mechanisms for altering the vote count.
>>
>>  There needs to be a process in place to verify just prior
>>  to voting that neither the hardware nor software has
>>  been compromised.
>>
>>  You'll need at least a UPS and possibly a generator.
>>
>>  How will you handle a hardware failure?
>>
>>  Physical security:
>>   If you have more than one machine in the set up, then
>>   you have introduced a network connection which brings
>>   the possibility of the vote being compromised.
>>
>>   How is the actual vote recorded? Via touch screen?
>>   You don't want a voter alone in a booth with your
>>   voting machine, a mouse, and keyboard.
>>
>>
>>-Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Tom Poe wrote:
>>
>>>Hi, All:  Over at:
>>>http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/discus.cgi
>>>if you click on the link for Think Tank, there's a huge international 
>>>discussion going on about voting, electronic and paper, stuff.
>>>
>>>The question is, can there be a simple computer program that displays 
>>>the ballot, records the vote, and prints out the raw data for up to 1000 
>>>votes in a precinct.  The other requirement is it prints out a ballot to 
>>>serve as a paper ballot record.  That's the scope.  The idea is to put a 
>>>computer in a precinct, and conduct the vote for up to 1000 people.  No 
>>>network connection, internet connection, just the computer performing 
>>>those tasks.  Maybe there has to be two computers.  One for generating a 
>>>ballot.  And, one to receive the vote count.  Seems like it should only 
>>>be one computer to me.
>>>
>>>Anyone have a quick fix on what would be needed?  We don't want to go 
>>>beyond what it takes to do more.  Oh, and it has to be GPL, not 
>>>proprietary.  For all I know, there's a calculator in Engineering that 
>>>already does that.  Is it GPL'd?  :)
>>>Tom
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Cialug mailing list
>>>Cialug at cialug.org
>>>http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Cialug mailing list
>>Cialug at cialug.org
>>http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
Dave:  You're right on target with this.  Certification needs to be 
something that is independently performed, but satisfies the present 
laws and regulations.  I suspect that the state will eventually take on 
that responsibility within the state, rather than rely on a federal, 
centralized certification procedure.  However, if we develop an open 
source program, print the ballot, and use the ballot as the official 
count, rather than the computer, we have something that is closer to 
protecting our right to vote.

Unavoidable, being dragged through the tangled mess of our great 
democracy.  But, we leave that to others.  It's a "here's the option, 
take it or leave it approach" and let the powers that be stew in their 
juices kind of thinking.  San Diego did something similar with their 
mayoral runoff election, and the pot is boiling out there.  They didn't 
use open source, so the amount of leverage achieved was less than it 
could have been.  We can correct that little flaw, and the next time, 
all hell just might break loose, and we have avoided the tangled mess issue.

You partied with a Kennedy last night?  :)
Tom

-- 
Open Studios, Charles City, Iowa, USA
www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tompoe.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 293 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://cialug.org/pipermail/cialug/attachments/20050902/5760b39f/tompoe-0001.vcf