Comments on: Bill introduced to ensure states have auditable voting methods for presidential election http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/ Just another WordPress weblog Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:08:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Em http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482864 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:11:19 +0000 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482864 Mnem, I know one of the team leads who investigated evoting security for the state of California. Let me tell you: the <i>un</i>classified report was enough to scare me shitless. Mnem, I know one of the team leads who investigated evoting security for the state of California. Let me tell you: the unclassified report was enough to scare me shitless.

]]> by: Cicero http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482829 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:23:30 +0000 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482829 The only thing touch-screen voting machines should be used for is the creation of a visually-verifiable paper ballot. It should not keep any votes in memory. Also, the ballot should not have anything on it other than voter selections: no barcodes, number codes, etc. The only exception would be a GUID*, in that 2 copies would be produced: one to be put in the ballot box, and one for the voter to keep. At any time after the election, a voter should be able to go to the election offices and demand to see his/her ballot. The GUID would be used to make sure you get the right ballot, and then you visually compare the two. If they don't match, you got your fraud right there. *Global Unique Identifier (yes, I'm a computer guy, how could you tell?) Later, The only thing touch-screen voting machines should be used for is the creation of a visually-verifiable paper ballot. It should not keep any votes in memory. Also, the ballot should not have anything on it other than voter selections: no barcodes, number codes, etc. The only exception would be a GUID*, in that 2 copies would be produced: one to be put in the ballot box, and one for the voter to keep. At any time after the election, a voter should be able to go to the election offices and demand to see his/her ballot. The GUID would be used to make sure you get the right ballot, and then you visually compare the two. If they don’t match, you got your fraud right there.

*Global Unique Identifier (yes, I’m a computer guy, how could you tell?)

Later,

]]> by: Doug S. http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482827 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:02:25 +0000 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482827 I'm proud that Rush Holt is my Congressman. Did I mention that he has a Ph.D in physics? ;) I’m proud that Rush Holt is my Congressman.

Did I mention that he has a Ph.D in physics? ;)

]]> by: paul http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482801 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:16:50 +0000 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482801 We're pretty much screwed regardless. Big pile of government money, available for localities to spend with questionable oversight in the middle of an election year? Graft out the wazoo. And lack of certified machines is a great way to stop people from voting. (I'm not really opposed to the bill, but I seriously doubt it can help at this point.) We’re pretty much screwed regardless. Big pile of government money, available for localities to spend with questionable oversight in the middle of an election year? Graft out the wazoo. And lack of certified machines is a great way to stop people from voting.

(I’m not really opposed to the bill, but I seriously doubt it can help at this point.)

]]> by: Mnemosyne http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482760 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:56:22 +0000 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/bill-introduced-to-ensure-states-have-auditable-voting-methods-for-presidential-election/#comment-482760 California decertified electronic voting machines before the presidential election in 2004 and is just now <a href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vsr.htm" rel="nofollow">starting to recertify them</a>. My county primarily uses the Inkavote system, but that's being investigated, too. California decertified electronic voting machines before the presidential election in 2004 and is just now starting to recertify them. My county primarily uses the Inkavote system, but that’s being investigated, too.

]]>