Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday May 07 2019, @12:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the primary-software dept.

Submitted via IRC for ErnestTBass

From checking in at a polling place on a tablet to registering to vote by smartphone to using an electronic voting machine to cast a ballot, computers have become an increasingly common part of voting in America.

But the underlying technology behind some of those processes is often a black box. Private companies, not state or local governments, develop and maintain most of the software and hardware that keep democracy chugging along. That has kept journalists, academics and even lawmakers from speaking with certainty about election security.

In an effort to improve confidence in elections, Microsoft announced Monday that it is releasing an open-source software development kit called ElectionGuard that will use encryption techniques to let voters know when their vote is counted. It will also allow election officials and third parties to verify election results to make sure there was no interference with the results.

"It's very much like the cybersecurity version of a tamper-proof bottle," said Tom Burt, Microsoft's vice president of customer security and trust, in an interview with NPR. "Tamper-proof bottles don't prevent any hack of the contents of the bottle, but it makes it makes it harder, and it definitely reveals when the tampering has occurred."

Developed with the computer science company Galois, the kit will be available free of charge for election technology vendors to incorporate into their voting systems.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2019/05/06/720071488/ahead-of-2020-microsoft-unveils-tool-to-allow-voters-to-track-their-ballots


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday May 07 2019, @10:51PM (5 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday May 07 2019, @10:51PM (#840492) Journal

    You asking us to have faith in the machine. *That I cannot do* Paper still requires the least amount of faith, at the least cost and the least effort. The machine is cool, but not without the matching printout, with permanent ink :-)

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday May 07 2019, @11:32PM (4 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 07 2019, @11:32PM (#840508) Journal

    You asking us to have faith in the machine. *That I cannot do*

    Not (blind) faith, but (reserved) trust.

    The same trust (and not faith) you have when using your car.
    You trust that the physics of the combustion and the thermodynamics is sound, you trust that the engineers designed the engine so that it doesn't kill you, you trust your mechanic has done the service correctly, you trust that the road are good enough for the model of your car all the way to your destination, you trust yourself to be able to react properly to driving conditions. And yet there's still a risk that you may die during driving and you accept that risk because it's small enough.

    Some reflections on trust, security and society from Bruce Schneier [schneier.com]. Nothing magic or religious in nature.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday May 07 2019, @11:40PM (3 children)

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday May 07 2019, @11:40PM (#840515) Journal

      but (reserved) trust.

      That's what the paper is for. What exactly is the problem?

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday May 08 2019, @12:27AM (2 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 08 2019, @12:27AM (#840536) Journal

        That's what the paper is for. What exactly is the problem?

        Neither paper is foolproof. The effort of counting (nearly 300 died counting votes [qz.com]) and the error rate is higher for paper.

        I'll grant you that an electronic system:

        • is not simple - but not impossible - to ensure trust
        • is dependent on infrastructure - power, communication, computers

        Should the society remain at the level of buggies because the rate of car accidents is higher for cars?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday May 08 2019, @02:17AM (1 child)

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday May 08 2019, @02:17AM (#840587) Journal

          That's a horrible analogy. Computers do not offer significant improvements over paper, only expedience. That's not always a good thing.

          You can have your computers, but give us paper or forget it. I don't know why you insist. It's a silly argument. Trust isn't a good thing either. Trust is an adversarial relationship. You "trust" your enemies. If you have to trust your friends, they are not your friends. The best thing for an election is minimal trust and maximal verification. Paper is still best for that. The computer can assist.

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
          • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday May 08 2019, @08:31AM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 08 2019, @08:31AM (#840688) Journal

            You have a very peculiar definition of trust.

            I don't know why you insist.

            I'm done with it.

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford