Slashdot Log In
Linux-Based E-Voting In Brazil
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Oct 07, 2008 04:36 AM
from the watch-and-learn-grasshopper dept.
from the watch-and-learn-grasshopper dept.
John Sokol writes "I just heard from a good friend and Linux kernel hacker in Brazil that they have just finished their municipal election with 128 million people using Linux to vote. They voted nationwide for something like 5,000 city mayors. Voting is mandatory in Brazil. The embedded computer they are using once ran VirtuOS (a variant of MS-DOS); it now has its own locally developed, Linux-based distro. These are much nicer, smaller, and cheaper than the systems being deployed here in the US. Here is a Java-required site with a simulated Brazilian voting system. It's very cool; they even show you a picture of the candidate you voted for."
Related Stories
[+]
Linux: Linux On Brazilian Voting Machines, the Video 252 comments
Augusto writes "Just 10 days ago, 130M Brazilian voters were turned into users of one of the largest Linux deployments worldwide: the 400,000 electoral sections in all of the 5,563 Brazilian municipalities were running electronic voting machines, and the Linux kernel was running in all of them. These voting machines have been used in Brazil since 1996, and are rugged, self-contained, low-spec PCs. We've discussed the technical details of this Linux deployment and implementation elsewhere, but I thought it would be interesting to show some pictures (and a movie) of Linux booting on these voting machines. So I asked for official permission and thus was helped by a technician while I took some quick pictures and made a small movie showing the boot process, where you can actually read the kernel messages."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Science Fiction! (Score:5, Funny)
It's very cool; they even show you a picture of the candidate you voted for.
Wow! Incredible! I never thought something like that would be possible with a computer!
Re: (Score:2)
Wow! Incredible! I never thought something like that would be possible without a computer!
There, fixed that for you. Speaking of fixing: Why fix something that ain't broken? Voting with Pen&Paper has worked for centuries, there is no need to fix anything.
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, and I mean typewriters worked for ages without having to use Office software, we could go to the moon with a computer that was slower than a modern calculator, and speaking of voting didn't it work just as well without black people and women interfering?
I tell ya, things used to be just perfect the way they were, progress just ruins society.
Parent
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Interesting)
Brazilian cities were able to know the election results in the same day of voting, before midnight. That's pretty damn efficient.
Furthermore, as fas as trusting or not trusting goes, voting with pen and paper is not as perfect [wikipedia.org] as one might think.
Parent
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Funny)
Brazilian cities were able to know the election results in the same day of voting, before midnight. That's pretty damn efficient.
That's nothing, here on Argentina, we're able to know the election results months before voting. God bless democracy!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Brazilian cities were able to know the election results in the same day of voting, before midnight.
You mean:
Brazilian mayors were able to rig the election results in the same day of voting, before midnight.
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Insightful)
I trust a paper more then some bits. Can you abuse it and do forgery? Yes, but with paper it is much harder. Try changing my vote on a piece of paper. Then try changing some bits in a PC. Now tell me which one will be noticed first.
This is not about if paper is perfect. It is about if it is closer to perfection then a computer and it is.
The goal is not speed.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember signing on to the electoral roll in Canberra somewhere back in the very early 90's. A few weeks later I received a letter from the commission saying after an investigation I no longer lived where I said I did so they have removed me from their list. I'm thinking I live on a Navy base, I have no hope of being posted anywhere for a few years, so, er, WTF? What investigation?
I wrote back and asked WTF? They replied to the same Canberra address I enrolled with and said you don't live there any longer
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
an alliance of media groups, former politicians, judges and armed drug dealers and militia.
Sure sounds like government to me.
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Informative)
Totally different from the rest of the world.
Actually, it's pretty similar to the rest of the world. Voters are mostly uninformed on the issues and uninterested in getting informed.
Parent
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Interesting)
It has worked? I am not so sure about that, for an election to work it has to be void of frauds and offer some guaranties to the electors, like anonymity. Election are not a simple problem, in fact is a very hard one.
The elections on Brazil seem to work fine, in fact many of the "left" parties (Brazil has many political parties) felt their numbers get better after the electronic voting was installed. But the system, as it is now, gives no warranty on how the votes are counted, you have to trust it is working and has not been tampered and as far as I know the code and designs of the voting machines are not open for review by the population.
I trust that the system work, it has shown consistent numbers with the election day pools and as I said the system has been show to give results that are bad for the current government, that is the one witch could more easily tamper with the election, several times.
Parent
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Insightful)
That's fine for you, but one principal of a democracy is that the vote is open and transparent. When there's a vote, I can go to the voting place and control that the process works fine. I can verify almost everything important first hand (at least in Germany, where I live). With voting machines, only a few people in the whole world can control the system. Even if the software is free, there are only few people who understand the source code and can verify it. The vote is _not_ transparent.
Oh, and don't tell me that voting machines are unhackable. Here [youtube.com] you can see a voting machine being hacked in 60 sec.
So, you have vs. .
I agree, that elections are not a simple problem, but pen&paper is a simple solution and at the moment the best.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Even though I don't think that "our" (I'm Brazilian) voting machine could be much better, I don't think that paper+pen works better.
In the past, when candidate A was part of the government, there used to be a lot of "accidents" with the vehicles carrying the voting papers from locations on which candidate B was known to have a good number of votes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With electronic voting, you only need one accident. All you need is for someone to accidentally insert a thumbdrive. Or accidentally press the "demo key sequence".
It's so much easier to cheat with electonic voting.
Printing thousands of fake paper votes and moving them into the right locations can be done, but it is a lot more work than cheating with electronic voting.
Even if the source code is validated, the res
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While I agree that our election is far from perfect, I don't think that pen & paper is the best solution. It introduces many more places where it can be frauded, the accounting, false ballots and much more. A unified electronic voting has many advantages and can be made more safe by adding cryptographic receipts, for instance.
I know that electronic voting can be hacked, but if you raise the bar too high it start to get impractical hacking. Compromising single units can be easy, but if it can be detected
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I trust it to work better than the old paper one, but the eletronic system is getting less trustworth on every election. The first version of it used a small embbebed system, with no OS, then it changed to a closed OS, then it changed to Linux (ok, better than the closed OS). It's system was entirely (hardware and softwre) verified by several specialists choosed by a transparent process, then comes the closed OS, that can't be verified, and suddenly the transparent process cha
Re:Science Fiction! (Score:5, Funny)
Problem is it's too complicated for american voters. Punching a hole in next to a name was too complicated. typing in a 2-4 digit code? are you MAD??
Expecting Americans to have that level of ability is ridiculous. It's why Diebold is designing systems that are far easier to use. you go and vote, and it registers the vote they think you should have voted.
It's far more accurate and eliminates problems.
Parent
One reason this simulator is so cool... (Score:2)
Great! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)
Now where is the link to the source code and how can I verify that it is the code that was really running on the machines?
As a matter of fact, contrary to what Wikipedia says, the source code *is* available. The Ministério PÃblico (something like the public prosecutor in US), the OAB - Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, an organ that congregates all lawyers in the country and any of the political parties can have access not only to the source code but to the compilation, digital signing and installation process. They also can run simulations and test the system for security and fraud and request any ballot to be audited. The whole software and data is also available for 2 years after the election. During the election days, representatives of any party can stay at any polling station to be sure that the election is not being rigged in this point. Personally, I think our system is quite secure and would require a major conspiracy involving basically everyone.
Parent
I'll bite (Score:3, Interesting)
First, mobile phone cameras, or any other, were forbidden in the ballot - though from my experience this was only enforced in areas where there were a reasonable possibility of people selling votes or being coerced to vote, such as in Rio de Janeiro.
Second, no one said the process was unhackable. It is just much harder to hack than a paper and pen election. It is auditable by anyone with sufficient technical expertise, and that is good enough for mosrt people who care.
And finally, shut up and at least do
Another slow news day? (Score:2)
I mean really , Linux getting used for some large public function might have been news back in 1998 , but whats the big deal in 2008? Some stories about some unusual OS's being used in unusual situations , say CP/M still controlling a nuclear reactor , now THAT would be interesting. Linux gets used in voting system? ZZZzzzz......
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, of course you could modify a linux machine as well, but with a potential army of hackers the security risks are handled much like the security in Linux: Assuming that for every one hacker that is malicious there is usually one or at least two that spot a problem and bring it to light.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
say CP/M still controlling a nuclear reactor , now THAT would be interesting.
Why... It is probably more common then you think. In the US Nuclear Plants are aging and the Liberal Hippies will not fund to keep them up to date, as Nuclear is Bad OK. It is actually quite common to see old computers running Nuclear systems. As they have work for decades and there is no reason to risk a new system that may have problems.
When will we have web based voting (Score:5, Interesting)
We have web based banking. Why not web based voting?
If anyone thinks I care more about who I vote for than the money in my bank accounts (and my liability for debt) they're disillusional. The politicians are all just different monkeys screeching different things that suit them. In the last election I voted for (mandatory council elections) I didn't know or care about the candidates who'd only shown their faces 2 weeks beforehand. On the ballot I wrote "Fuck them liars all. This form of democrasy a joke". Am I the only one that thinks it's hilarious that we can bank online but not vote online?
Re:When will we have web based voting (Score:5, Insightful)
Risk of fraud. Under the current system I can't go out and bribe, blackmail or threaten voters, because I have no way of determining whether or not they voted as I asked. 'Vote for X or I break your legs' doesn't work if I cannot find out whether or not any given person actually did vote for X. But while you can take steps to ensure that the polling booth is private, you can't say the same for an internet terminal whose location you do not know and whose configuration you do not control. For all you know the voter's boss is watching him as he votes for the candidate who will restrict workers' rights and remove regulations on abusive bosses.
The moment there's a way a person can prove who they voted for to a third party, the secret ballot is dead.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I should bloody well hope not. [bbc.co.uk] Immediately after the rules were changed in the UK, so that postal votes were available to anybody who asked for one, without them having to give a good reason why they couldn't vote in person, a great saga of electoral fraud began. Including intimidation campaigns [birminghammail.net] by thugs - of course, entirely without the knowledge of the candidate in question.
Weaken the secrecy of the ballot, and these crooks w
Re:When will we have web based voting (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, in Estonia, there has been web-based elections a year ago. The national ID card has PKI certificates in it and this cryptographically makes it safe. There's more information on the net, ie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia
Parent
Re:When will we have web based voting (Score:4, Insightful)
If you vote on a third party website, you'll trust it with your votes, and its secrecy but, contrary to banks, you will have no way of checking that your vote is correctly accounted for.
Parent
Re:When will we have web based voting (Score:4, Informative)
1. Anonymity of vote (nobody can tell who I voted for)
2. No third party of trust (I do not need to trust anyone, especially thos organizing the election)
3. Trust of count (The votes are correctly counted and totalled)
There are surprisingly little literature around cryptographic system designed to solve these three problems. All the electronic voting system that I am aware of rely on the revocation of one of these properties.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's hilarious that you don't seem able to even spell democracy any better than you understand it. If you don't care about the election then stfu about the outcome of it.
If you want to vote online then find a candidate who feels the same way about it as you and vote for them. Or run in the election yourself.
Whatever you do though, don't whine on slashdot about it!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Because banking and voting are different problems. Banking requires accountability (non-repudiation), voting anonymity. There are solutions for both, but anonymous electronic voting that's verifiable while being untraceable is so far unimplemented.
The flexibility and usefulness of paper voting continues to be underrated in these discussions.
Re: (Score:2)
Next step is a paper trail (Score:4, Insightful)
This is great
I do really miss a paper trail, that is needed in case there are doubts of "fraud", we do not want such doubts, do we ?
Voting, mandatory?! (Score:3, Insightful)
How un-American. Oh wait...
The best part.... (Score:2)
You can vote for Carmen Miranda for president!
Hurray for the party of music and fruity hats!
IT is a trap ! (Score:4, Interesting)
This is a step back from paper ballots.
How Hypocritical (Score:2)
Smaller,nicer and cheap != more secure.
I fail to see where this is better security wise than the Diebold boxes. I love linux, I prefer linux (though I mostly use OS X these days) but just because it runs linux, does not make it better.
And web based voting? Seriously? You are just BEGGING for fraud with that.
Bias .. (Score:2)
Voting in the US using commercially developed machines: Evil! Unreliable! What is the world coming to! US elections unfair! Dictatorship coming soon!
Voting in Brasil using open source el cheapo machines: Profit!! Democratic wonder! Fantastic solution! US could learn from this!
How do you mean, Slashdot is biased..
Void Vote (Score:3, Interesting)
You can vote blank or null vote with that machine. That's good, but I really
want to write %#%@%$!! in the ballot sometimes.
Review of the voting machine by a poll worker (Score:5, Interesting)
I work at the polls here in Virginia, and we have an electronic voting machine. Here's my review of the Brazilian device compared to ours:
In any event, I think SL geeks are obvious choices to volunteer to be Officers of Election. We know the vulnerabilities of the technology, and have the necessary attention to detail to appreciate the kinds of auditing checks that need to be done to run a fair and open election.
About the Brazilian voting system... (Score:4, Informative)
Some people who work during the elections are volunteers. while others are drafted by the Superior Electoral Tribunal. You can still not go there and do your job as long as you have a strong justification (like not being in the city you vote on the day of election). There is no voting 'in transit' i.e. voting in another city, or in any other 'electoral college' besides your own.
As a compensation, you get a 'lunch ticket' and a letter which entitles you a 1-day off so you can compensate your day working on the Sunday election (just give the letter to your employer, he cannot refuse you the day off, it's part of the electoral law)
By 5:00 PM, no one else can vote. If there is a line, people are given numbers ad only those with numbers in line can cast their votes.
once the last voters finish, the voting system is set to 'closed', meaning no more votes can be computed. at least three paper trails are generated, for three of the people in charge of the voting table. Any one can go there and ask for an extra paper trail, such as me and you. usually, a few people ask for additional paper trails on behalf of their own parties. You can check the paper trail gainst the voters registered for that college, to see if there are any irregularities.
Potentially, a parallel vote counting can be set up, completely contolled by the population, just using the paper trails generated at the end of the election.
The president of the table then takes the machine to the Electoral Tribunal and there they pick up the internal data and do the vote counting.
IMO it's reasonably resistent to tampering, and allow for parallel counting, which makes it resistent to frauds. Yeah, being open source would help for sure, and setting up a country-wide parallel vote counting would be very hard, but it is possible.
I believe the U.S. should just license our technology and be happy with it ;-)
Re:How it's done (Score:4, Informative)
Is like this.
Oh well, I'm sorry that you Americans will have to put up with your Diebold chosen masters in the next election... hope it doesn't turn out too bad for you.
From the wiki:
In 2004, Diebold-Procomp decided to migrate to Linux as a cost reduction measure.
Parent
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see any of the problems resolved.
You can still tamper with the system and there is no verifiable audit.
I don't know that the underlying choice of OS was biggest problem (if I were building it, sure I'd choose Linux) - there are more fundamental process issues that are at fault. Namely, that someone could tamper with the election and no one could (dis)prove it.
Parent
Re: Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
At least, here in Brazil, the election results always match the exit polls and no serious allegations of tampering were made. We've been using this system for 10 years without any major problems.
Something that the Americans could learn from the Brazilian system is the simplicity of its use: no touch screen, you just type the number of your candidate in a keyboard that is the same used in telephones and then press a huge green button.
Parent
In defence of the US (Score:5, Interesting)
Looking at this here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Brazil [wikipedia.org]
About half way down it lists the result of the 2006 election : couple of points on that:
(1) There are a lot of parties (~30)
(2) They have low overall control within the parliament (15% max)
(3) The socialists are on top
E-voting or no, if the socialists were to rig the election (a) it would be obvious that they did it, (b) they would have to go all out to make any kind of difference, (c) they are unlikely to have the corporate influence necessary to pull it off and (d) there isn't much you get for it.
In the US, on the other hand, there is effectively two parties each with ca. 50% of the electorate each, so rigging the election is (a) worthwhile and (b) easy to get away with. On top of that the Republicans are very good friends with the people that make the machines, and finally, you get to be 'leader of the free world' and all your buddies get rich.
Means, motive and opportunity - right there. The interface is the least of their worries.
Parent
Re:How it's done (Score:5, Insightful)
Crappy software running on linux is just as easy to rig...
the problem with Diebold is political not technical
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry, but mostly machines are built by Diebold who bought Procomp in Brazil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions
http://www.samurai.com.br/urnaeletronica/ue2004/view
Re:How it's done (Score:4, Informative)
All the IP is owned by the Brazilian Government. Diebold is just the assembler with the lowest price.
Not that it makes the machine secure, it is just slightly better than the US situation.
Parent