a_unique_person
26th February 2003, 03:03 AM
Clash over voting machines
Wednesday 26 February 2003, 16:05PM
At least one in 10 voters in the United States cast ballots in the last presidential election on electronic voting machines, whose popularity is growing as counties replace the antiquated systems blamed for Florida's hanging chad debacle.
But in Silicon Valley, computer scientists want to halt the trend - at least until voting machines are redesigned to produce a paper record of every vote. They say paper backups offer more protection against hackers - or political hacks - who might tamper with electronic results.
The debate over the security of voting computers reached a peak this week, when the Santa Clara County board of supervisors tentatively approved an investment of $US20 million ($A33 million) in 5,000 touch-screen machines.
The machines, whose screens look similar to ATM screens, allow voters to press a button to make their choices or touch keys to write in a candidate's name. But unlike ATMs, the terminals approved for Santa Clara County do not produce paper receipts.
The paperless system angered computer scientists gathered for the board meeting. If supervisors had rejected the contract bids and required a paper trail, Santa Clara would have become the nation's first county to purchase the so-called voter-verified paper backup system.
"I'm disappointed," said Peter G. Neumann, principal scientist at the computer science lab at Menlo Park-based SRI International. "You'd think we'd have enough of an understanding of computers to know that a voter-verified paper backup system is the absolute only way you can have any integrity whatsoever in elections."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/26/1046064096610.html
Worrying, the potential for undetectable fraud with a purely electronic system is incredible.
Wednesday 26 February 2003, 16:05PM
At least one in 10 voters in the United States cast ballots in the last presidential election on electronic voting machines, whose popularity is growing as counties replace the antiquated systems blamed for Florida's hanging chad debacle.
But in Silicon Valley, computer scientists want to halt the trend - at least until voting machines are redesigned to produce a paper record of every vote. They say paper backups offer more protection against hackers - or political hacks - who might tamper with electronic results.
The debate over the security of voting computers reached a peak this week, when the Santa Clara County board of supervisors tentatively approved an investment of $US20 million ($A33 million) in 5,000 touch-screen machines.
The machines, whose screens look similar to ATM screens, allow voters to press a button to make their choices or touch keys to write in a candidate's name. But unlike ATMs, the terminals approved for Santa Clara County do not produce paper receipts.
The paperless system angered computer scientists gathered for the board meeting. If supervisors had rejected the contract bids and required a paper trail, Santa Clara would have become the nation's first county to purchase the so-called voter-verified paper backup system.
"I'm disappointed," said Peter G. Neumann, principal scientist at the computer science lab at Menlo Park-based SRI International. "You'd think we'd have enough of an understanding of computers to know that a voter-verified paper backup system is the absolute only way you can have any integrity whatsoever in elections."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/26/1046064096610.html
Worrying, the potential for undetectable fraud with a purely electronic system is incredible.