Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Report: Electronic voting machines canít be secured"
The Canton Repository ^ | 2 December 2006 | Associated Press

Posted on 12/02/2006 3:06:34 AM PST by lifelong_republican

"WASHINGTON Paperless electronic voting machines in widespread use across the country may be vulnerable to errors or sabotage and cannot be made secure, a draft report by a federal agency said.

The report by researchers at the influential National Institute of Standards and Technology said the paperless voting machines - essentially notebook computers programmed to display ballot images and record voter choices - "in practical terms cannot be made secure."

"Many people, especially in the computer engineering and security community, assert that the (voting machines) are vulnerable to undetectable errors as well as malicious software attacks," the report said..."

(Excerpt) Read more at cantonrep.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electronicvoting; evoting; representation; vote; voter; voting
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
Americans don't need to hand off their voting duties to anyone else, much less to unknown individuals who may not even be Americans, anyway.
1 posted on 12/02/2006 3:06:38 AM PST by lifelong_republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
Yup......I believe it was Stalin that said....I don't care how u vote....as long as I get to count them!
2 posted on 12/02/2006 3:40:27 AM PST by M-cubed (Why is "Greshams Law" a law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: M-cubed

Built by commies and endorsed by the 'Rats. Whose happy now?


3 posted on 12/02/2006 3:51:35 AM PST by sidegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

It's what I've been saying for some time.


4 posted on 12/02/2006 4:01:36 AM PST by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB

When will this be reported by the DBM?


5 posted on 12/02/2006 4:10:45 AM PST by jcparks (LFOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

Machine read paper ballots (NOT punch cards). The best of both worlds. I don't understand this fascination with "touch-pad voting" that seems to have gripped state voting commissioners.


6 posted on 12/02/2006 4:23:38 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
as a software professional who has delivered a number of embedded solutions over the passed 20 years, I can tell you this solution can be made secure, reliable, and allow for detection of vote tampering.

only question would be whether or not they actually want such a thing... which at this point I firmly believe they do not.

7 posted on 12/02/2006 4:52:52 AM PST by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

Solution?

paper ballot(if it ain't broke, don't fix it)


8 posted on 12/02/2006 5:21:06 AM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots. Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

What is wrong with the good old lever type of machine?


9 posted on 12/02/2006 5:24:26 AM PST by Dahoser (It's going to be a long and miserable two years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dahoser

Shoot. Get the pols out of it. Let us vote at our ATM machines. I trust the banking system better than any one day makeshift operation staffed by old volunteers. It is already regulated, audited and running smoothly.


10 posted on 12/02/2006 5:37:59 AM PST by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

I keep reading about voting problems at these machines.

A polling place gets an average of 8 machines from what I can tell. Someone would have to either attack the machines before they are installed, or change the data after the votes are accumulated.

The machines aren't on a network so they cannot be hacked. No one is sending out thousands of hackers to break in to a secure location, open the machine, change the information and get out.

So the only scenario is the program that gets pre loaded is corrupted, which again, you have candidates, issues and other things to be concerned about.

Unless there is a major conspiracy which involves hundreds of people, I am afraid that this whole voting machine manipulation is a myth.


11 posted on 12/02/2006 5:48:22 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted." Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
Noone hears any screaming on this website or others that this election may have well been stolen by the dims.

If Christian/conservatives just crawl in a hole and cover up, then America has qwuit being America!!!

12 posted on 12/02/2006 5:50:48 AM PST by 100-Fold_Return (I'll Never Be Broke Another Day in My Life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

I'm with you. Perfect mix of simplicity and technology.


13 posted on 12/02/2006 5:54:48 AM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sten
"..as a software professional who has delivered a number of embedded solutions over the passed 20 years, I can tell you this solution can be made secure, reliable, and allow for detection of vote tampering."

No real possible audit trail. Machine-scanned paper ballots are the best possible solution--as the voted ballots are sealed inside the machines, and can be counted directly by humans in the event of a recount. No "all electronic" solution will EVER be as secure.

14 posted on 12/02/2006 6:01:56 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

The chances of human error are so much greater than machine error that hand recounts only appeal is that it is so time consuming people just give up and accept the results, no matter what they are. How many times did we used to count and recount money to make sure we were right? 3, I think. Imagine three manual recounts.


15 posted on 12/02/2006 6:35:32 AM PST by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
I don't understand this fascination with "touch-pad voting" that seems to have gripped state voting commissioners.There is money to be made selling the touch screen machines. That is what is behind the push for voting machines. Machine read paper ballots (NOT punch cards) is the most practical and honest system. That is what we have here in Wyoming and it works well and people have confidence in it.
16 posted on 12/02/2006 6:58:18 AM PST by tommix2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

"Unless there is a major conspiracy which involves hundreds of people, I am afraid that this whole voting machine manipulation is a myth."

The line voice of reason on a thread where FReepers parrot a probable troll who only posts voting machine articles. DUers are lauging about this thread.


17 posted on 12/02/2006 7:26:56 AM PST by L98Fiero (The media as a self-licking ice-cream cone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

"No real possible audit trail."

?? Except for the paper that prints after you vote.


18 posted on 12/02/2006 7:28:02 AM PST by L98Fiero (The media as a self-licking ice-cream cone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sten
as a software professional who has delivered a number of embedded solutions over the passed 20 years, I can tell you this solution can be made secure, reliable, and allow for detection of vote tampering.

"Never say Never" statements like that are the reason why auditing exists as a profession, and why IT auditors always talk about reasonable assurance, management appetite for risk, and the need to almost always never say Never or Always.

19 posted on 12/02/2006 7:31:39 AM PST by Bernard ("Talking is better than shooting" - Tommy Franks. What have you got to say?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Solution?

paper ballot(if it ain't broke, don't fix it)

You really want the FloriDUH voters to vote on butterfly ballots again? We'll have "hanging chads" in every election from now on, and so many disenfranchised voters.

20 posted on 12/02/2006 7:58:37 AM PST by Arrowhead1952 (The terrorists have many allies in the United States, especially in the democrat party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

RYMB!


21 posted on 12/02/2006 8:44:22 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest (Watching the Today Show since 2002 so you don't have to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero
"?? Except for the paper that prints after you vote."

And THAT frill accomplishes exactly what??? A slip of paper left in the hand of the voter does squat to protect the integrity of the balloting process. A paper ballot sealed inside the machine which can be hand counted does.

22 posted on 12/02/2006 9:11:14 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt
"The chances of human error are so much greater than machine error that hand recounts only appeal is that it is so time consuming people just give up and accept the results, no matter what they are."

A "potential human error" count is a hell of a lot better than a system in which an honest recount is impossible. All-electronic voting is just plain DUMB.

23 posted on 12/02/2006 9:12:46 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

i never said the solution would be all electronic. just secure and reliable. it would have the added bonus of being able to produce instant, up to the second tallies across the nation.


24 posted on 12/02/2006 7:05:37 PM PST by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sten
"i never said the solution would be all electronic. just secure and reliable. it would have the added bonus of being able to produce instant, up to the second tallies across the nation."

Electronically scanned paper ballots can already do all that, while retaining the integrity of the balloting process by storing the ORIGINAL voted ballot sealed internally in the event that a recount is needed.

There's already a superior approach available off-the-shelf. "Touch-screen" systems are a drastic step in the wrong direction. Pick the BEST system, and use it.

IMHO, electronically-scanned paper ballots are the best possible choice.

25 posted on 12/02/2006 7:30:09 PM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: M-cubed

You are right, of course. The counting must be observed.


26 posted on 12/03/2006 5:04:47 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DB

Thank you, DB. Your patriotism is appreciated.


27 posted on 12/03/2006 5:05:24 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

You make an excellent point about the fascination with touchscreens. Even banks don't use them on their newer ATMs because they're so problem-prone.


28 posted on 12/03/2006 5:07:35 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sten

I totally agree with you that the use of manipulatable 'voting' systems is deliberate.


29 posted on 12/03/2006 5:08:41 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
You wrote:

Solution?

paper ballot(if it ain't broke, don't fix it)

You are absolutely right. Well said.

30 posted on 12/03/2006 5:10:54 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dahoser

A lot of people asked that question about the lever machines when they were confronted with the huge expense and lack of accountability of the electronics. They were claimed not to meet HAVA - the Help ('Hack') America Vote Act - if I recall correctly, because of a lack of a paper printout. The corrupt Democrats of the Rendell mob made paper printouts from the electronics 'illegal' in PA, which is a more demonstrable violation of HAVA. Those crooks have been violating PA law all along. They even started refusing perfectly legal elector demands that the systems be examined by independent experts.


31 posted on 12/03/2006 5:15:44 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sten
I don't want to get into a tit for tat, but I'm a professional electrical engineer that also has more than twenty years of experience. I've written a lot of code for numerous controllers, DSPs and CPUs that are embedded in my hardware designs.

And I strongly disagree with your assessment.
32 posted on 12/03/2006 5:15:59 AM PST by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

Why do you believe that a computer must be on a network to be 'hacked'?

What you want to imagine would be a 'myth' is a very real problem, and it affects you, too.


33 posted on 12/03/2006 5:17:34 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 100-Fold_Return

I agree totally.


34 posted on 12/03/2006 5:18:14 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Arrowhead1952

Why do you believe that a paper ballot must equal a 'butterfly ballot'?


35 posted on 12/03/2006 5:19:49 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

I'm not so good at acronyms but one of interest is "MTBF", which stands for "Mean Time Between Failures". The votefraud systems fail far more often than the typical desktop IBM-clone, yet they cost ten times as much.


36 posted on 12/03/2006 5:22:30 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican
Hack America Vote Act. I love it!

How hard could it be to add a paper printout capability? But that's not the question. What is the question, as you're pointing out, is how best for the RATS to rig elections. Disgusting.

37 posted on 12/03/2006 6:11:47 AM PST by Dahoser (It's going to be a long and miserable two years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

"And THAT frill accomplishes exactly what??? A slip of paper left in the hand of the voter does squat to protect the integrity of the balloting process. A paper ballot sealed inside the machine which can be hand counted does.

OK, let's go over this again. When I voted last, I did so electronically. As I completed the voting process, a receipt printed and REMAINED INSIDE THE MACHINE. I was able to view my selecions, on paper, through a small glass window.

That is THE definition of a paper trail, is it not? Please, question liberals at every turn. What they are spouting about electronic voting is largely BS.


38 posted on 12/03/2006 6:15:32 AM PST by L98Fiero (The media as a self-licking ice-cream cone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
"?? Except for the paper that prints after you vote."

And THAT frill accomplishes exactly what??? A slip of paper left in the hand of the voter does squat to protect the integrity of the balloting process. A paper ballot sealed inside the machine which can be hand counted does.

At my polling place (touchscreens, Santa Clara county, CA), the printed record that he's referring to does stay sealed inside the machine. Seen through a plastic viewing window, the voter has a chance to review it and change his votes before they're cast but the printed record stays within the machine.

A printed record that you take with you would be an open invitation for voter intimidation: "Please bring your voting record to the next (union/NEA/whatever) meeting."

39 posted on 12/03/2006 6:22:10 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sten
As a com-sec and IT professional that has audited the security of vast numbers of commercial and military systems over the last 20 years, I can tell you that no solution can be made completely secure and reliable. You can only mitigate the risks.

Electronic-only systems are not only vulnerable to being compromised but highly vulnerable to being compromised with out the compromise being detected.

Of all of the automated voting systems I've seen, the electo-optical systems had the most resilience. The ballot is marked with an indelible marker and the vote counter scans the ballot. In the case of a problem, all of the ballots can be recounted electronically or manually. This removes the electronic system as the single point of failure.

40 posted on 12/03/2006 6:36:13 AM PST by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero; Bob
"OK, let's go over this again. When I voted last, I did so electronically. As I completed the voting process, a receipt printed and REMAINED INSIDE THE MACHINE. I was able to view my selecions, on paper, through a small glass window."

That is different from my understanding of the process, which was that the "receipt" was printed out and left with the voter rather than stored internally. As I recall, NO story I have seen about touch-screen voting has mentioned this rather critical key point.

If that's the way it works, and a paper hard copy is sealed within the machine, then I have no objections.

41 posted on 12/03/2006 7:40:59 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
If that's the way it works, and a paper hard copy is sealed within the machine, then I have no objections.

I have no idea if it's done that way everywhere but it does work that way at my polling place.

42 posted on 12/03/2006 7:56:28 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: lifelong_republican

"Why do you believe that a computer must be on a network to be 'hacked'? "

I don't know. Given 20+ years of IT experience, much of it having to do with programming & security. In addition to the time that could be alotted to individually hacking a machine while people are waiting in line to vote, plus the number of machines that have to be hacked to receive the results the Democrats seem to claim are nationwide.

Aside from that, unless there are massive breakins the level of fraud the Democrats claim would have to occur on a network level.

Then again, the Democrats didn't make any fraud claims this election like they did when they lost the Whitehouse in 2004 and congress in 2002. Which tells me one thing. VOTING FRAUD BY DIEBOLD IS A MYTH!!!!



43 posted on 12/03/2006 8:27:36 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted." Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
You are correct, Sir!
Electronically scanned paper ballots are the best solution.
44 posted on 12/03/2006 12:18:14 PM PST by relee (How ironic that the fatal flaw of communism would turn out to be that there is no money in it - AWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

EXACTLY!...best post on this thread!


45 posted on 12/03/2006 5:12:11 PM PST by M-cubed (Why is "Greshams Law" a law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Knitebane

This removes the electronic system as the single point of failure.<<<...Bingo!..we have a winner!


46 posted on 12/03/2006 5:14:56 PM PST by M-cubed (Why is "Greshams Law" a law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dahoser
You said:

"Hack America Vote Act. I love it!

How hard could it be to add a paper printout capability? But that's not the question. What is the question, as you're pointing out, is how best for the RATS to rig elections. Disgusting.

Yes, you're right. The corrupt Democrats of the Rendell mob in Pennsylvania have illegally refused citizen calls for independent evaluations of the systems.

47 posted on 12/04/2006 6:05:48 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

Computers can be hacked before they're ever connected to a network. Some of the votefraud systems in use actually have wireless connectivity, too. The belief that this problem would be a myth because someone didn't notice that the problem has been exposed for awhile is a non sequitur.


48 posted on 12/04/2006 6:10:15 AM PST by lifelong_republican (Valid Elections: The Idea of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sten

You are most likely correct. Before this last election there was a guy on Fox in the morning showing how people could touch screen vote and if there was a paper trail the paper would print out something different than they pushed.
Probably why Dems wanted this. I don't think they want a good system like you are speaking of. They prefer cheat machines!


49 posted on 12/04/2006 6:19:28 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sidegunner
Built by commies and endorsed by the 'Rats.
And pushed into county elections offices by federal grant money run by a supposed Republican majority (before the last election).
50 posted on 12/04/2006 6:22:41 AM PST by hedgetrimmer (I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson