Idiot BBV editorial and my response

[eridani]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2001898724_lance09.html

Re Lance Dickie's editorial on electronic voting of 4/9/2004--

Odd that he considers people who object to the absence of a paper trail to be crystal-waving New Age technophobes--it is exactly the top tier of computer security specialists who object to it. I'll take the word of specialists in this area over the workd of Auditor Terwilliger. However well-intentioned he is, he is not a computer security expert.

I object to the fact that the software that counts our votes is capable of counting negative votes. I can think of only a few reasons why such a thing would be allowed, none of them good. Logic and accuracy tests are meaningless--I flat out don't care if the system can count negative votes consistently and reproducibly-I don't want the system to do this at all!

Computer security experts has shown that proprietary voting systems used in the US are far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. For example instances of unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal using the Diebold GEMS system,which is in use in King County.

In addition, some voting machine manufacturers are intimately tied to vested interests, including the owners of voting machine testing labs, active politicians and their principal fundraisers, corporate lobbyists, former CIA directors, and people who have been involved in prosecutions for bribery, kickbacks, and fraud.

In my opinion,the facts that the computers that handle our ballots are not open, that their software and programming is not available for public scrutiny, and that there is no way for a voter to verify that the ballot selections stored in computer memory are the actual ballot selections made by that voter constitute a direct assault on the very nature of democracy.

[lapfog_1]

1. BBV

While I am not an expert on BBV machines and/or their potential
problems, I am one of those computer security folks. I don't trust
much, if anything, related to computers and security. I don't think
its a problem (BBV) that can be fixed easily. The creation of a paper
trail, while a huge improvement over NO paper trail, should not be
viewed as some sort of panacea. For the paper trail to come into
play, one would have to suspect fraud, and in a tight race (where
fraud is much more likely to be attempted), that one candidate or
issue wins when various exit polls call the race different, fraud
may not come quickly to mind (though a recount is more likely).

In addition, how would the paper ballots be counted... probably by
some sort of computer system... and in the stupid logic of these
systems, a computer system created by the same people that provided
the BBV system. Oops.

Give me a room of little old ladies and punch card or paper marked
ballots any day. If allowed to count every vote, I have more faith
in them any day.

P.S. I have a special credit card, with a very low limit (that
I had to ask for special), that I use for online purchasing. If
what I want to buy cost more than my limit, I go purchase it at
the store. I never use a credit card for "every day" purchases
like gas or groceries, and I have a habit of going to the bank,
withdrawing large sums from the teller, and then buying what
I want with cash. Why? You would be shocked at the current state
of the art (hardware, software, and practices) employed by major
corporations regarding your private data. I know of one instance
that a large tax prep company had a computer stolen which had
tens of thousands of complete tax returns from clients on it.
Unencrypted. Pretty soon, all of your tax prep will be done
offshore if you use a service. Think about that on tax day.