Even though the issue of electronic voting security has yet to be taken seriously in the United States (we're looking at you,
Diebold), the Dutch government appears to be very concerned about the
shenanigans that hackers recently pulled with one of Nedap/Groenendaal's old-school machines, and has taken several steps to ensure that the equipment is as hack-proof as possible prior to the November 22nd national elections. According to a translated article on the site Nu.nl, officials have ordered Nedap to double-check every single terminal, replace all of the weak software, and install unflashable firmware so that the simple "
Diebold memory hack" can't be replicated in the Netherlands. Furthermore, all of the machines will be retrofitted with an iron seal that will presumably prevent unnoticeable access to their innards, and two additional independent checks will be performed to add another layer of redundancy: a certification institute will make sure that Nedap has performed all of the necessary upgrades, and the machines will be spot-checked for accuracy once again on election day. Finally, the Dutch intelligence service AIVD will reportedly look into the RF emissions that enable snoopers to wirelessly establish a vote tally, although it doesn't sound like the inquiry will have any immediate effect on this gaping security hole. Despite these changes and increased oversight, though, it seems that the voting group responsible for the original hacks is still not confident that all of the problems have been solved; we certainly see their point, however, we'd suggest that a government that at least acknowledges and makes moves to alleviate these serious concerns is already far more progressive than one that seems to be waiting around for an e-voting "Enron" before taking the initiative to sort out this significant threat to the democratic process.
[Via
Slashdot]
posted Oct 15th 2006 9:13PM
At least some people somewhere realize that e-voting is a disaster waiting to happen if it doesn't change soon.
Yah waiting.....right.
You've got to ask yourself why isn't it taken serious in the U.S. Who is going to gain from a complete lax in voting security when the November elections role around? Give me five minutes with the Diebold software and hell I could rig it to become president!
Now if only someone would hack a US machine to play Duke Nukem. Maybe someone (besides Engadget) would wake up and realize that ours are just as insecure.
That might work, actually. Voting machines turning into video games is the sort of thing that TV news would pick up, and that anybody could understand.
People always make the most fuss where it has the least significance.
You realy think they are "waiting around for an e-voting "Enron" before taking the initiative"?
They are much likely waiting for everyone to forget about it, so they can continue maipulating the votes to their liking. Not that it makes much of a difference. It would be much more trouble if you (US) guys would start to notice that it doesn't make much of a difference if you vote Rep or Dom. They are all the same bunch of elite white men. Even if there would be a black female president anytime, that wouldn't make a difference.
"US democracy" is all show and has nothing to do with the idea of democracy. Unfortunatly most other "democracies" are not that far behind in being mere shows for the stupid masses.
LTM, you need a little more influence to become president. One machine won't do. But if you could promise the CEO of Diebold some lucrative gov-contract I guess he would listen ...
Here in the UK we use a pencil to put a cross on a piece of paper. Rather like that old tale about the Russian space pen....
Why are RF emissions a "gaping security hole"? It's a read-only flaw, and it's not like there's any grave danger in figuring out how the election is going in advance. The worst you could do would be figure out how an individual is voting; even that would be tricky.
@John Stracke:
in a country where the president gets away with saying "You're with us, or against us" I reckon being able to vote anonymously is pretty important...
I would like to comment on the risks of e-voting to democracy in Brazil:
We believe that our work on e-voting in Brazil should be a matter of concern in both developed and developing countries. In addition to the lack of security of e-voting technology, which is very well explored by academics in both Brazil and in the developed world, we have raised some questions that need further discussion with regards to alienation, digital divide, market-driven and voter-driven approach to e-voting.
● Alienation [1]: With the introduction of e-voting both elections and the electoral processes are no longer controlled by voters, they become the property of those who run or manage them. In this case, the voting machine maker or a multinational corporation controls the whole system and the voter is alienated from the electoral process itself. The election becomes an external phenomenon inaccessible to the voter who can no longer scrutinize it. Transparency as a basic principle of democracy is eliminated, because there is not an open and transparent counting of votes. It is argued that “whoever controls the voting machines can control who wins the votes”.
● Market-Driven Approach [2]: When access to a technology like e-voting is created by market-driven forces or corporate actors and not by society itself, democracy is in jeopardy. It seems that e-voting is not affordable in Brazil and it was not a demand-driven option. The introduction of e-voting in Brazil was the result of discussions done behind closed doors, with corporate actors celebrating high revenues, and not the result of research work and discussions with the Brazilian society. At this moment, it is imperative to identify and assess the risks of e-voting machines to democracy.
● The Voter-Centered Approach [1]: As the fields of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) advance, the opportunities for participation in the information systems development have expanded considerably. In the development of an electronic voting system, the voter or citizen participation is of fundamental importance in the process of dialogue. In this case, we have diverse voices of all interested parties. There is need to focus on the humanization of the electronic voting system so that it can be developed under a more elaborated socio-political approach, expanding the concept of user-centered to a citizen or voter-centered approach. Let us avoid an approach that means the use, and abuse, of the user of the system..
● The Digital Divide [2]: The rhetoric of the digital divide does not take into account political and social inclusion. It addresses “participation in the digital economy” issues only. It is argued that the discourse of the digital divide has failed to capture the picture of inequity and alienation. If we reformulate the conceptualization of the digital divide, the problem of “access”, as the heart of digital equity, began to emerge.
[1] Rodrigues Filho, Jose; Gomes. Natanael P. E-Voting in Brazil – Exacerbating Alienation and the Digital Divide. Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on e-Government, Marburg, Germany, 2006.
http://www.academic-conferences.org/eceg/eceg2006/eceg06-abstracts.pdf
[2] Rodrigues-Filho, Jose; Alexander, Cynthia C; Batista, Luciano C. E-Voting in Brazil – The Risks to Democracy. 2nd International Workshop on E-Voting, Proceedings: Electronic Voting 2006, Bregenz, Austria, 2006.
http://www.e-voting.cc/topics/Resources/