-
October 14th, 2004, 11:15 AM
#1
voting machine programming
this isnt a call for help so i put it here. i used to do database programming. it seems to me that programming for voting machines would be relatively easy with the bulk of programming aimed at error handling and validation. so, why is there such trouble with the voting machines? what am i missing here? a table of candidates with the record for each candidate incremented by one...where is the big deal?
-
October 14th, 2004, 11:22 AM
#2
Registered User
I've been wondering the same thing. Exactly how do these voting machines work and why is it so difficult to accomplish such a seemingly simple thing?
-
October 14th, 2004, 02:27 PM
#3
Registered User
people dont think its constitutional
im all for it
-
October 14th, 2004, 04:16 PM
#4
Registered User
They don't want it because they don't understand it and choose not to understand it.
I'd rather be riding my motorcycle
"I gotta have more cowbell, baby" Bruce Dickinson(Christopher Walken)
-
October 14th, 2004, 05:10 PM
#5
Registered User
Well, if you are talking about why people don't like it, possible explanations would be the statements by the owner of the company (diebolt) that he "would do anything to elect G Bush" the lack of a paper trail to confirm votes in the event of a machine or server failure..(as just happened in florida btw..delaying their electronic voting test) The lack of system security as evidenced by the large number of stories regarding hackable machines where the votes could be and were changed..and in at least one case, voting machines being left out in public with no security around them, and one even being found on a street corner..?
-
October 14th, 2004, 05:54 PM
#6
There are several things that need to be guaranteed for voting to work.
1) Everyone who is registered to vote is allowed to vote. Whether they vote or not is not the issue, but if a registered voter shows up at the polls they should be allowed to vote.
2) No one votes who is not registered to vote. (Similar to #1)
3) Verifying that each person who is registered to vote votes only once.
4) Verifying that a person is who they claim to be.
5) Preserving the secrecy of the individual votes
6) Ensuring that the system is auditable from end-to-end and results correct.
-----------------------------
With physical polling locations (unlike e-voting), 1-4, perhaps even 1-5 are handled by the people running the election - even if using electronic voting machines. They have a list of people registered to vote in a district, they ask for state photo ID (such as a driver's license), and then they check the name off the list. With paper ballots, the ballots go into a locked box under guard. If a discrepancy occurs, it is easy to say "X" number of people came into vote, "X" ballots were filled out - and count the things by hand if need be. Even if there is a problem with "hanging chads" or "stray marks", if nothing else you can class a hopefully minute fraction of ballots as invalid - and the responsibility for making sure a clearly marked ballot is turned in belongs to the voter.
The problem with electronic voting machines is largely in #6. If you press the button on the touch screen that records your vote, you have no "proof" that your vote was tallied correctly. This is where the importance of a paper trail comes into play.
There needs to be a system in place that encodes both the new vote, as well as a timestamp and a CRC (such as an MD5 hash) of all the old values + the new value. This is the problem with computers - it is pathetically easy to change values on a computer, then alter the date/time stamp back to the way it was originally. There needs to be a way to audit the whole log of entries to an electronic voting machine that is verified and "impossible" to fake (such as an MD5 hash).
A refusal to provide an auditable system casts doubt on the accuracy of the system. "Trade secrets" and "proprietary code" arguments are useless - if the system is secure (based on algorithm strength) then code can be (and should be ) on public display. The election process needs to be as transparent as possible for trust to remain in the system.
Most of the electronic voting machines in use right now (Diebold) are running Windows, and storing the results in an Access database. Access does not provide much in the way of auditing entries; the new entries are simply added to the database. Windows has too many known issues, and Access is known to corrupt data and lose entries (especially when it starts nearing 1 million records). Electronic voting is a good idea, but it is being badly implemented.
-
October 14th, 2004, 05:59 PM
#7
Registered User
Warning: my programming skills suck
'calculate votes based on Diebold presidents assertation that he will "deliver Ohio to
' Bush"
<%
dim
bush
kerry
If votebutton= "bush" then bush = bush+1
Elseif votebutton= "kerry" then bush = bush+1
endif
%>
There you go, that should just about do it
Edit: Beaten to the Diebold punch by Geoscomp
-
October 14th, 2004, 07:23 PM
#8
Originally Posted by Titchski
Warning: my programming skills suck
'calculate votes based on Diebold presidents assertation that he will "deliver Ohio to
' Bush"
<%
dim
bush
kerry
If votebutton= "bush" then bush = bush+1
Elseif votebutton= "kerry" then bush = bush+1
endif
%>
There you go, that should just about do it
Edit: Beaten to the Diebold punch by Geoscomp
my point is that i dont think it would take much in the way of programming to implement a system that works...it seems to me that the bulk of the programming would be for validation and security...and a paper receipt is an absolute necessity. oh...and it should be open source...
-
October 15th, 2004, 07:44 AM
#9
Driver Terrier
they are using access??????????????????
Was the systems analyst a first year computing student?
Access is completely unverifiable and unauditable. Even the FDA will not touch it with a barge pole. If a company in the uses Access to record test results, it cannot get FDA approval.
Never, ever approach a computer saying or even thinking "I will just do this quickly."
-
October 15th, 2004, 08:35 AM
#10
Registered User
Originally Posted by NooNoo
they are using access??????????????????
Was the systems analyst a first year computing student?
Access is completely unverifiable and unauditable. Even the FDA will not touch it with a barge pole. If a company in the uses Access to record test results, it cannot get FDA approval.
they seriously use access?
you'd think that the terminals would just be versions of a thin client interacting with a local server that would dump the information off to a mainframe.
Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.
Sun-tzu (~400 BC), The Art of War. Emptiness and Fullness
-
October 15th, 2004, 08:45 AM
#11
Registered User
Election officials dismissed the criticism from computer experts Wednesday. "Although any electronic voting system is hypothetically `hackable,' I am confident that the likelihood of this occurring is extraordinarily remote," said Linda Lamone, the Maryland state administrator of elections.
Lamone outlined a dozen challenges a hacker would have to overcome. Chief among them are obtaining a working knowledge of the software's specific programming language and gaining physical access to computer servers and voting machines.
Hmmm..lets see...that means that i am not constantly cleaning viruses and spyware out of computers?
-
October 15th, 2004, 10:41 AM
#12
So when I take computer testing, like for MSCE or CNE or A+ or whatever, I show up after I register. They scratch my name off of a list and tell me what computer is ready for me. I go, do my test, and the results are all mine. They already seem to have a decent system that sounds like it could be easily changed so that an administrator has the computer ready for you, it logs it as you, they check your id, mark you off, you go in, do your thing, it logs off and waits to be logged in as the next person.
-
October 15th, 2004, 03:09 PM
#13
-
October 16th, 2004, 04:34 AM
#14
Driver Terrier
Originally Posted by ShadowWynd
O M F G
Never, ever approach a computer saying or even thinking "I will just do this quickly."
-
October 16th, 2004, 04:57 AM
#15
Laptops/Notebooks/PDA Mod
Originally Posted by ShadowWynd
Here are some links.... read it and weep.
Only in America!
Similar Threads
-
By paraflyer in forum Politicos
Replies: 6
Last Post: September 1st, 2004, 01:22 PM
-
By Stalemate in forum Tech Lounge & Tales
Replies: 4
Last Post: May 20th, 2004, 03:46 PM
-
By Wyckyd1 in forum Windows XP
Replies: 2
Last Post: April 3rd, 2002, 10:03 AM
-
By paulfromdinotown in forum Networking
Replies: 4
Last Post: October 19th, 2001, 12:37 AM
-
By mohjg in forum Windows NT/2000
Replies: 6
Last Post: May 13th, 2001, 01:11 PM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks