Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Open Source Government United States Politics

E-Voting Reform In an Out Year? 218

An anonymous reader writes "Most of us know the many problems with electronic voting systems. They are closed source and hackable, some have a default candidate checked, and many are unauditable (doing a recount is equivalent to hitting a browser's refresh button). But these issues only come to our attention around election time. Now is the time to think about open source voting, end-to-end auditable voting systems and open source governance. Not in November of 2012, when it will, once again, be far, far too late to do anything about it." It'll be interesting to see what e-voting oddities start cropping up in the current election cycle; Republican straw polls have already started, and the primaries kick off this winter.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

E-Voting Reform In an Out Year?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 24, 2011 @08:40PM (#36562976)

    You can't have people leaving with proof about how they voted, lest they'd be coerced by thugs waiting around the corner for proof that they voted as agreed upon, or else.

  • by techno-vampire ( 666512 ) on Friday June 24, 2011 @08:58PM (#36563166) Homepage
    We know that government agencies would pay, bribe, or trick developers into sneaking a backdoor in.

    Really? You know that for a fact? What evidence do you have, or are you just spouting your mouth off?
  • by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Friday June 24, 2011 @09:02PM (#36563188) Homepage

    Open source is really irrelevant. You can never prove that the voting machine is running an un-altered binary produced from that code on unaltered hardware and with unalterable memory. It's not bad, but it doesn't guarantee anything, so if that's what you think is keeping voting from being equal to a magician counting the votes, then that's a false sense of security you're feeling.

    The way you make voting secure is to take the part where you have to trust the machine's memory, with no way for the voter to confirm that its contents are correct -- the magician, essentially -- out of the picture.

    Instead, the machine should simply be an enabler for printing a correct ballot. That paper ballot must be the only ballot that matters. That ballot can be machine readable, but it must also be human readable, and it must be the same markings that both human and machines read to determine who the ballot is for.

    In this regime, it doesn't matter if the source is open or closed. It doesn't matter if the voting machine is compromised. Because now the "magic" is out in the open, so if the machine tries to pull any tricks, the voter has the ability to actually see that their vote was recorded incorrectly, and not put that ballot in the ballot box.

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...