Computer voting sucks
Posted on July 25, 2003
Filed Under /dev/null/ | 66 views |
In Microsoft’s biggest enemy is… I agreed with Scoble that the more information become digital, the more effectively we can deal with it. But some things, some critical systems, should be done the old-fashioned way. Voting is one of those. You’ll never sell me on the idea that a tamper-proof voting system can be created. As the NY Times reports in Computer Voting is Open To Fraud, the state of computer voting systems is pretty abysmal:
The software that runs many high-tech voting machines contains serious flaws that would allow voters to cast extra votes and permit poll workers to alter ballots without being detected, computer security researchers said yesterday.
…
The systems, in which voters are given computer-chip-bearing smart cards to operate the machines, could be tricked by anyone with $100 worth of computer equipment, said Adam Stubblefield, a co-author of the paper.
In this case the problem is that their system appears to suck to it’s core. The over-arching problem with computer voting is one of oversight. Or rather, the lack thereof. In paper elections that take place in locales where one can be reasonably assured of no rampant, deep-rooted corruption at the ballot box there are over-sight measures to ensure that ballots are not tampered with, that the count is accurate, and that no one monkeys with the process in an appreciable way.
This doesn’t exist with digital voting. The black-box nature of the systems, designed to keep people out, also means there’s no easy way to see inside to make sure nothing’s gone wrong. No electronic voting systems that I’m aware of even utilize a paper-based back-up to facilitate manual counting, a simpe measure that might lend some credibility to the process. Until this issue is addressed punching holes in little bits of paper in rooms filled with people remains the best way we have of voting (assuming you don’t live in Florida… sorry, couldn’t resist. You folks are never going to live that one down).
Comments
Leave a Reply