this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
111 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59135 readers
6622 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
enu@lemmy.world
111
Computer scientist shows how to tamper with Georgia voting machine, in election security trial: “All it takes is five seconds and a Bic pen.” (www.ajc.com)
submitted 9 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Computer scientist shows how to tamper with Georgia voting machine, in election security trial: “All it takes is five seconds and a Bic pen.”::An expert witness for plaintiffs seeking to bar Georgia's touchscreen voting machines showed a crowded courtroom how he could tamper with election res

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 55 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

https://citp.princeton.edu/our-work/voting/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVWIOwSkMew

What's really sad is this is literally the same guy who proved the same thing in 2006. (I'm going on a limb and assuming this is the same J. Alex Halderman who wrote this paper at Princeton)

This has been an ongoing problem for almost twenty fucking years.

I went looking for this info because it spurred a memory. The "bic pen" was a part of this hack nearly 20 years ago, and the reference to it made me remember the original.

Fucking travesty.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 31 points 9 months ago (2 children)

It scares the shit out of me that the US has so fully adopted voting machines. They are incredibly unreliable and it would be so easy for a bad actor to hack an election. Especially with FPTP, it would be so easy to goose the numbers in a couple of key districts and swing an election for whomever you wanted to win. It's almost definitely already happened several times.

In Canada we still do voting on paper, but then the votes are counted electronically and the paper copy is kept for recounting by a human later if needed. It's sort of the best of both worlds.

[–] evatronic@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

It's not everywhere.

States that do vote by mail are just like you describe -- paper ballots collected and counted by computer, with the paper preserved.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

Not all states are fully electronic. Many districts (including mine) are run on paper ballots that are then scanned.

I would be more concerned about the upstream tabulation systems. The possibility of making bulk changes is much more harmful than tampering with single voting machines.

There was a mad dash to electronic voting after the Bush v Gore hanging chad fiasco. A lot of people are still focusing on the voting machines vs. the integrity of centralized tabulation systems.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 31 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I have said it before and I'll say it again, electronic voting does not work and is a bad idea.

The election system is dependant on trust, trust that the votes are not changed nor counted incorrectly.

This works with paper ballots, you keep the ballot box sealed and under observation by observers from different parties, they can then verify that the ballots have not been changed after voting, you count the ballots together, in front of everyone, they can then verify that counting was done correctly.

With electronic voting the votes are cast by interacting with buttons on a black box, no one is able to verify that the votes are recorded correctly nor that they are counted correctly during the actual election.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago (2 children)

In California we have electronic voting machines that are basically glorified printers. You go through the vote flow, then it prints your ballot and you can verify it's correct before it goes in the ballot box. All the upside of electronic voting and none of the downsides. Since it's printed consistently it's easier to electronically count as well without mistakes that can happen from scanning hand filled ballots. Even human vote counters can mistakenly read a hand filled ballot.

[–] Grellan@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's how it is in Georgia to. You make your selection, receive a print out which has your chooses visible on kt, put that into the counting machine which is next to a table where you get your I voted sticker so it's monitored for tampering. They then take your print out and put it in a box for manual recounts if called for.

[–] Waldowal@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But don't you then put it into a scanner that actually tallies the votes? The paper exists, but my understanding is it's not a hand count. There is still opportunity to manipulate the scanner.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

But you still have the paper ballot so that when it's time for a recount you can validate the electronic and paper copies match.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

That is fine, and a good usecase

[–] rowinxavier@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago (6 children)

In Australia we have a robust and fast paper voting system administered by the Australian Electoral Commission. We get most results in the evening of election day with only really close races being a couple of days out. There is solid chain of custody on paper ballots and having been used for over a century we have all the kinks worked out.

The USA has about 330 million people, we have about 25 million. The voting population of each is smaller, but it is a much larger percetage of our population due to compulsory voting. If we can do it with less than 10% of the population it could be done there with the same ratio no worries, just assume out country was a state and you can see it can work.

Paper is safe and secure. It is well understood and all the hack and hijinks have been worked out. If you ask experts in IT if they think voting should be dine electronically they answer hell no without much debate.

[–] Pheonixtail@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Am an IT professional (and also happen to have a degree in politics, i've had a weird life), can confirm.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Ditto in the UK 50 million people putting crosses on paper with pens in one day. First results come in about 2 hours after the close of the polls at 10pm, 95% done by the time you wake up the next day. Electronic voting has plenty of downsides and no upsides for anyone other than the people making the voting machines.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I am an IT professional, and yep computers should not do election voting

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

Electronic voting for deciding a conference/meeting venue is fine, but anything involving governance over a large body of people is a strict no-no.

Reason: if other nation states are interested in tampering with the election, they can easily do it with the amount of resources they have. Paper vote is a distributed system which is very hard to tamper AT SCALE.

[–] RIPandTERROR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 9 months ago

IT professional:

If I had my way we would all use paper and pen

[–] jnplch@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 9 months ago

Germany uses paper ballots. 60 million eligible voters, 3/4 actually voted during the last federal elections.

[–] Pheonixtail@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Am an IT professional (and also happen to have a degree in politics, i've had a weird life), can confirm.

[–] yuki2501@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

xkcd warned us and that didn't listen.

https://xkcd.com/2030/

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 9 months ago

And also literally the guy from the OP article, who is the same guy who first demonstrated this kind of hack in 2006.

[–] Steve@communick.news 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I like the system we have in New Mexico. (Yes it's one of the 50 states)

You can go to any poling place, and they print you a local ballot for where you live, right there. You fill in the bubbles with your choices, then run it through a scanner machine on your way out.

You get instant counting and can track results live all day. If there's a technical problem, or any uncertainty in the results, you can always go back to the paper and hand count.

It gives the benefits of all the options.

[–] beefontoast@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What is the gdpr reason this website is not available to users in Europe?