Voting

D.C. Suspends Tests of Online Voting System | Slashdot

Posted on by Matt Woodward

One of the articles mentioned that some browsers submitted blank forms because they don’t support inline PDF forms. Who, exactly, thought that using PDF was a good idea? The whole point of the web is that it provides layout standards. Why even bother using a web browser if you’re just going to try to hack around it by using a completely different content format, PDF, shoved in using browser plug-ins. It might has well have been Flash. Use the web or do not. There is no halfway.

My jaw hit the floor when I read this. I’m not sure how you can get so incredibly far afield with what should be a pretty simple system. The group developing the system DC was testing needs some serious help if they’re sticking PDFs in a browser and calling it online voting. So incredibly unnecessary I can’t even begin to fathom how they wound up with this as a solution.

Sequoia To Publish Source Code For Voting Machines

Posted on by Matt Woodward

“Voting machine maker Sequoia announced on Tuesday that they plan to release the source code for their new optical-scan voting machine. The source code will be released in November for public review. The company claims the announcement is unrelated to the recent release of the source code for a prototype voting machine by the Open Source Digital Voting Foundation. According to a VP quoted in the press release, ‘Security through obfuscation and secrecy is not security.'”

Not that I care about Diebold, er, Sequoia releasing their source code because if anything ever needed a ground-up grassroots effort it’s voting machine software, but has this been a great week for FLOSS FUD killing or what?

First we get the White House moving to Drupal, then we have the Department of Defense stating they prefer open source because it’s more flexible and secure, and now this. Very cool.

Personally I think this is a pre-emptive PR move on Diebold/Sequoia’s part because of the previous announcement by the Open Source Digital Voting Foundation, so it remains to be seen if they ever actually open source the code. All they say is they have “plans to” do so.

Sequoia Voting Systems Source Code Released

Posted on by Matt Woodward

What was revealed was thousands of lines of MS-SQL source code that appears to control or at least influence the logical flow of the election, in violation of a bunch of clauses in the FEC voting system rulebook banning interpreted code, machine modified code and mandating hash checks of voting system code.

My jaw hit the floor when I saw this. I’m very passionate about open source voting systems so I hope this is yet one more nail in the coffin for the company formerly known as Diebold. Elections cannot continue to work this way.

Note that you can download or study the code yourself and that this, according to the Election Defense Alliance, is “the first time the innards of a US voting system can be downloaded and discussed publicly with no NDAs or court-ordered secrecy.”

Let’s hope this turns into a big development in the move for reliable, open source voting machines nationwide.

Princeton Researcher Faces Legal Action if He Tests Voting Machine Security

Posted on by Matt Woodward

This is just horrendously disturbing. What the heck do these people have to hide? Makes ya think, don’t it? I hope this guy does it anyway–more attention needs to be brought to this situation.

Comments

Really interesting…it certainly does make you think. I think we should just push for open source voting software. Just as the Declaration of Independence is openly readable as well as all the laws, why not how our voting software works. It’s not like it should be proprietary or anything.

Posted by Kyle Hayes @ 3/19/08 8:14 PM

Apparently this particular voting machine can’t even do basic math correctly:

http://tinyurl.com/2k3j6t

Posted by Matt Woodward @ 3/20/08 7:36 AM

Yeah, that’s pretty scary.

Posted by Chris Vigliotti (hibiscusroto) @ 3/20/08 10:05 AM

I re-read this article recently, and found it disturbing as well–and relevant to this type of article

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

Posted by Keith Woods @ 3/25/08 3:39 AM