Another Lawsuit Filed To Stop E-Voting Machines

from the groundswell dept

Wed, Aug 16th 2006 12:23pm — Mike Masnick

For years and years people have been pointing out the massive security flaws in e-voting machines. While the companies in the space laugh off the problem or try to block those who try to make sure the devices are secure, it seems like more and more people are beginning to recognize the problems with the machines. They're speaking up and letting politicians know that they're uncomfortable with these machines. The latest is that yet another lawsuit has been filed to stop these machines from being used in elections. This lawsuit is in Pennsylvania but is similar to lawsuits elsewhere. It's certainly true that no voting system is perfectly secure -- but the level of correctable problems found in many e-voting machines, combined with the level of disdain the equipment makers show towards those who point out the flaws makes it worthwhile to try to stop these machines from being used in elections.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:31pm

I want to blame Bush too!
Jumping on the bandwagon here.

When is Bush going to pull the national securty card and say that the machines cant be tested properly because it might threaten national security?

Our votes must be rigged. Its in the interest of national security.

/me falls off bandwagon and bumps head.

ow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dan, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:37pm

I again reiterate my point... I can tell you that if you let me (or someone else with halfway decent computer knowlege) at one of these machines, I can break it -- period. esp if it's windows based.

I say have an e-interface that actually fills out the data on the card (so the rubes don't fill in the wrong bubble), have the person pick up the filled out card, and put it into an old fashioned vote counting machine.

That way, you've got a paper trail (yes: oudated) and a double check against the validity of the vote.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sanguine Dream, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:42pm

Just why...
are e-voting machines necessary? I'm just waiting for a major election that heavily invovles e-voting to get messed up results. As soon as a few politicians get screwed out of office I'll bet they'll suddenly seen the flaws. Remember kiddies both sides can't bride the manufactures of those machines so that means one side does have to lose.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Beck, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:47pm

Documented Paper Trail Problems in Cleveland
Ohio law says that the paper receipt printed by a touchscreen voting machine is the official ballot.

A research firm examined the results of a recent election in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) and found that 10% of the paper receipts were "destroyed, blank, illegible, missing, taped together or otherwise compromised," rendering them unusable for a recount.

Furthermore, they found that in 75% of the voting machines they examined, the paper record did not match the electronically-recorded votes. In a third of the machines the difference was more than 25 votes.

The research firm blames much of the problem on poll worker training, and Diebold agrees.

A county commissioner is recommending to voters that they vote by absentee ballot in November to ensure that their vote is counted correctly.

Cleveland Plain Dealer: 10% of May ballots flawed
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Beck, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:51pm

Re: Documented Paper Trail Problems in Cleveland
Sory, that link goes to page two of the story, here's page one:

Cleveland Plain Dealer: 10% of May ballots flawed
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ajax 4Hire, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:52pm

Dead Chicagoian want the right to vote!
Dead must unite!

It is much more difficult to vote electonically when you are dead.

Being dead should not be an excuse or limitation to vote!

We need the paper ballot, the absentee ballot, the mail in ballot to allow the dead, undead, alien (both outer-space and foriegner), man, woman and child, terrorist, Jew, Muslim, Christian, Budda, Dolphins, Elephants and Ants the right to vote!

I don't need not stinkin proof of citizenship to vote!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
me, 16 Aug 2006 @ 12:59pm

Remember!
Vote early, vote often!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Aug 2006 @ 1:17pm

I think voting machines will be as helpful to the world as 'credit cards'.

The amount of theft had increased dramatically since, now all you need is a number and you may well have access to large amounts of 'cash'.

With voting machines, I doubt it'll be much different. It's a can of worms just waiting to be opened.

While you can have 'this security measure in place' and 'that security measure in place' - all it takes is the ability to crack a backend database and then you can play with the numbers however you see fit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lay Person, 16 Aug 2006 @ 1:24pm

Don't get it
Don't know...if I can pay my cable bill online, I can vote online...PERIOD!

No fraud, no fixing.

I can register, authenticate, vote, get a confirmation and be done with it.

Why is everyone fudging all of this into more than it is?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
zeromus, 16 Aug 2006 @ 1:36pm

Re: Just why...
Many elections have screwed up results. Courts obfuscate discovery of this. And believe it or not, I'm not even talking about the hanging chads election. Vote fraud is rampant and off the national radar.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
qyiet, 16 Aug 2006 @ 1:44pm

Re: Don't get it
The key difference it electronic must record one vote per person, but *cant* record who voted for what. Your cable bill *must* record who paid it.

-Qyiet
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Man, 16 Aug 2006 @ 2:31pm

why spend the money
most of California is on a bubble scan tron style machine that has been around for years. Everyone can fill in a scan tron form. E-voting is just another waste of tax payer money. scan tron works fine, just replace the chad with that and call it a day. I don't want anymore of my money wasted on crap that we use only once every two to four years and only a minority of people actually use them. I would much rather waste my money on important stuff like emergency room bills for curing illegal allien colds and sending illegals to school. I mean, we have to have some government money left over for abortions don't we?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jon Williams, 16 Aug 2006 @ 2:35pm

an idea
I think that all vote results should be put on a website with a code number where voters can login and check if their vote was correct or not. Also, voters should be able to flag their vote on the site as verified so that others can see. I am sure there is a way to make voting systems accountable by putting results online in a way that makes them scrutinizable. SOMEONE must have a creative idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lay Person, 16 Aug 2006 @ 2:55pm

Re: why spend the money
Oh by the way...

that scantron buuble that's so great...

San diegans never got the mayor they voted for (Donna Frye) because they dismissed a good portion of votes as inadmissable due to the scantron forms not being filled out correctly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lil'bit, 16 Aug 2006 @ 2:58pm

problem here
I vote on a permanent absentee basis in CA because Oregon vote-by-mail spoiled me. Then I found out that, among the 3 million votes not counted in the last presidential election, many were absentee.

The only people who seem to demand instant election results are the media - I would rather wait a month for the results to be hand-counted and trustworthy, then find out the next day and wonder if the count is even close to the truth.

Or to be a real old-fogey, if paper and pencil were good enough for our ancestors, they should be good enough for us now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Man, 16 Aug 2006 @ 3:07pm

Too Stupid
If you are too stupid to fill in a bubble with an ink pen..............
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Aug 2006 @ 3:23pm

If I can pay my taxes online, why can't I vote online? I am more concerned about someone stealing my cash than stealing my vote.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BillDivX, 16 Aug 2006 @ 3:30pm

Corruption...
can't be fixed with any kind of voting, be it computer, scantron, punch card, or write in. The bottom line is, there is somebody in charge of the count, and if they decide to fix the votes, we will never know about it. If they are in someones pocket, we're all screwed. And, there will always be someone too dumb to cast their vote correctly, under any system we come up with. And that person will always be anxious to jump up and down about it when their candidate or measure loses. And, of course, in such cases, the decision will come down to a judge. It seems to me that such controversial decisions need to at least be routed through an elected body of some kind, if not the state or federal congress. Sure they could be corrupt too, but it's still a hell of a lot better than a randomly appointed judge, who is only one persons opinion, and could be getting paid for his decision.

I live in San Diego, although I wasn't able to vote in the above mentioned election, since I was still legally a resident of orange county at the time. I remember the Donna Frye fiasco, and that whole thing wreaked of corruption if you ask me. She won by a landslide in a three way race, as a write in candidate, and they threw out over a 1/3 of her votes, saying that you had to fill in the bubble next to the blank line for your write-in to count. That is far worse than any hanging chad. If someone has a name written on the write in line, it's pretty clear what the intention of the voter was.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lay person, 16 Aug 2006 @ 4:41pm

Hmmm...
Good presentaion BiilDivX.

You gave me the idea of having votes cast in a scrambled barcode with a key. Another machine that would do the counting would have the key as well decipher the barcode and make a count.

This way, no one would know what vote they were really holding. Only the machine that generated the code and the counting machine would know the details of the vote.

Only thing, there would have to be someone appointed somewhere, somehow, to ensure that this method is always in check...kinda like a secretary of weights and measures but obviously different.

Anyway, we'd have anonymity, hard copies (proof), and the machines can be served up on the net to view live tally results as they are processed. In addition, there would be an overly simplified, mickey mouse, touchscreen interface with big, colored, elbow sized, buttons. After a vote is cast, it would provide a fail safe asking "Are you sure you want to vote for ..." allowing you to reverse your choice due to whatever reason.

Finally we can test the entire system by using 4 year old kids as the subjects.
[ link to this | view in thread ]