Open Source Voting Software Concept Released

filesiteguy writes "Wired is reporting that the Open Source Digital Voting Foundation has announced the first release of Linux- and Ruby-based election management software. This software should compete in the same realm as Election Systems & Software, as well as Diebold/Premiere for use by County registrars. Mitch Kapor — founder of Lotus 1-2-3 — and Dean Logan, Registrar for Los Angeles County, and Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, all took part in a formal announcement ceremony. The OSDV is working with multiple jurisdictions, activists, developers and other organizations to bring together 'the best and brightest in technology and policy' to create 'guidelines and specifications for high assurance digital voting services.' The announcement was made as part of the OSDV Trust the Vote project, where open source tools are to be used to create a certifiable and sustainable open source voting system."

Can it run on Diebold hardware?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

If so it could let a lot of counties currently stuck with that PoC switch to the open source code without buying extra hardware. Just load the free software in the existing hardware (and maybe add a printer).

The Diebold machines are essentially PCs with touchscreens so they shouldn't be a tough port for Linux and the apps.

Using the existing hardware could save a bundle.

I don't get...

[Darkness404]

I really don't understand what problem electronic voting using computers is supposed to solve. Why not just make scantron ballots (some places already use them) they are paper so they are verifiable, easy to understand (who didn't have to do a multitude of these in high school?), and a machine can calculate them. About the only glitch is you can't change your mind without getting a new ballot, but its honestly not that hard.

Re:Solving the problem wrong

[fandingo]

Great post. I was thinking the exact same thing as soon as I saw Ruby was being used. It gets even worse than that: they are using Ruby on Rails. Slashdotters start foaming at the mouth thinking about how insecure Diebold code is; they should be furious that something as god-awful as RoR is being used for elections. RoR has its uses, but not in any kind of security sensitive situation.

The project does seem to be interesting because they are trying to get the FEC to update some of its certification requirements.

The only thing I want interpreted in my elections is hanging chads; keep that damn python and ruby to your selves. And get off my lawn!

Re:Programmer Thinking

[joshuaheretic]

I personally prefer paper ballots as well, and you're right that it's all about trust in the process. However, the fact is that many areas are rolling out electronic voting whether we would like it or not. And in a narrow field of options, I would like more than just a buggy, black-box Diebold piece of shit. If they can provide an OSS solution that works and can be audited for security and reliability, that would be infinitely preferable to the proprietary options with a poor track record. Just make sure there are paper receipts!

Re:I don't get...

[myspace-cn]

election terrorists?
Complete psyop propaganda.

Brad Friedman - http://bradblog.com/ [bradblog.com]
Bev Harris - http://blackboxvoting.org/ [blackboxvoting.org]

These two people are as far from election terrorists as you can get.

The one thing you purposely leave out of this discussion is the broken chain of custody which electronic signals representing votes create.

Your software runs on hardware, hardware which is not checked, because to check such hardware you would have to destroy it by reverse engineering it under an electron microscope.

If you on slashdot listen to this idiot AC, our country is going to keep screwing up down the same path. Officials KNOW electronic voting is rigged, that's why in conjunction with corporate media they can never be held accountable.