Showing posts with label Internet Voting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Internet Voting. Show all posts

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Pentagon Unit Still Hides Internet Voting Test Results


A nonprofit watchdog group is suing a Defense Department unit over its failure for three years to disclose the results of testing on the security safeguards of Internet voting systems that are increasingly being used to cast absentee ballots.  The Pentagon unit, the Federal Voting Assistance Program, has effectively bankrolled many states’ shift to online voting, disbursing tens of millions of dollars in grants for the purchase of equipment that includes Internet balloting options.  Its actions have drawn consternation from cyber experts, who have warned for years that Internet voting is an easy target for hackers who could tamper with or even fix election results.  The government’s premier technology testing agency also has refused to endorse these systems.

Now, on the eve of another federal election in which at least 31 states plan to use some form of online voting, the Electronic Privacy Information Center is pressing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding disclosure of the test results so it can disseminate the information nationwide.

The Federal Voting Assistance Program said it expects to release the results in 2015.  Because they “contribute to the larger, ongoing decision-making process” regarding the agency’s congressional mandate to conduct a demonstration project on electronic voting, it said, the test results are deemed “pre-decisional” and currently are exempt from disclosure.

The case, filed on Sept. 11 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, marks the latest skirmish in a long-simmering clash over the role of the Pentagon unit, whose primary task is to facilitate absentee voting by troops and other Americans living overseas.  The Pentagon unit said it conducted the tests for use by a separate agency, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which is attempting to set standards for Internet voting systems.  But a shortage of appointed commissioners has stalled that agency’s progress, and so the Pentagon agency said it is preparing to release the test results on its own.

The agency has walked a fine line since Congress declined, in a 2005 law, to endorse electronic voting systems until it receives assurance from the National Institute of Standards and Technology that they are secure and reliable.  In 2012, the last time the standards agency weighed in on the subject, it concluded that Internet voting systems “cannot currently be audited” with confidence because, unlike most electronic voting systems at polling places across the nation, there is no verifiable paper trail.  As a result, it said, “additional research and development is needed to overcome these challenges before secure Internet voting will be feasible.”

In an earlier statement, the institute said in 2011 that it would be “difficult to mitigate” malicious software attacks on voters’ personal computers, which are outside the control of election officials.  While each such attack could only impact one vote, it said, “attackers have demonstrated an ability to infect a large number of clients, and thus client-side attacks have the ability to have a large-scale impact.”  Officials at the Federal Voting Assistance Program have said they do not advocate online voting but support the use of systems that allow absentee voters to mark their ballots on computer screens and then print them for mailing.

However, vendors that peddle those systems to state agencies have included options for Internet voting, and some state legislatures have approved its use.  At least two vendors, San Diego-based Everyone Counts and Toronto-based Dominion Voting, have said in pitches to state agencies that their products passed the still-secret 2011 independent tests arranged by the Pentagon.  The testing protocols, however, could be called into question because no government agency has formally established test standards.

In seeking $39 million from Congress in 2011, the Federal Voting Assistance Program said that it would conduct tests on various online systems, including those allowing for absentee voters to cast ballots at overseas kiosks and systems in which votes could be emailed or otherwise transmitted via personal computers.

In its suit, the Electronic Privacy Information Center cited a series of public statements in which officials of the Pentagon unit pledged in the past to publicly disclose the results of their tests by certified testing laboratories.

In 2012, acting chief Pamela Mitchell of the Voting Assistance Program responded to written questions from Congress by advising that “the first assessments will be released in December 2012, with all of the assessments being released by the end of the second quarter (of 2013).”










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati talk bubble Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us Digg! StumbleUpon

Thursday, December 19, 2013

The Promises and Perils of Internet Voting


On 12/18/2013, the New York City Council's Committee on Governmental Operations chaired by Gale A. Brewer, the next Manhattan Borough President, and the Committee on Technology chaired by Fernando Cabrera held an Oversight Hearing on "The Promises and Perils of Internet Voting".  It lasted 2 1/2 hours.

They heard from:

Michael J. Ryan, Executive Director of New York City Board of Elections
Brian Kavanagh, Rep. 74th Assembly District
Eric Fredman, New York City Campaign Finance Board
Douglas A. Kellner, Co-Chair and Commissioner, New York State Board of Elections
Susan Lerner, Executive Director of Common Cause/NY
Kate Duran, Board Member of League of Woman Voters
Susan Greenhall, Verified Voting Foundation

All the witnesses agreed that internet voting was not ready for prime time for the following reasons:

1. Security of electronic transmissions and the opportunity to corrupt the website software were not ready for this type of transactions.

2. The inability to keep the privacy of the vote.

3. The inability to provide campaigns' monitoring of the vote.

4. Current cultural rituals and the possible disenfranchisement of certain voters.

5. The failure of the D.C.'s internet voting for military and overseas voters pilot. It was hacked in 36 hours.

6. The HAVA requirement of a paper trail.  The voter would not be able to see the marked paper ballot before it disappeared into the cloud.

The discussion then moved to the main reason for this type of voting, reducing the lines at the voting poll site.  These were some of the suggestions:

1. No Excuse Absentee Ballots.

2. Early Voting

3. Electronic Poll Books (laptop, tablets).  This would reduce the time it takes before you actually get to vote.  Some of the benefits and problems with this system:

A. WiFi Accessibility at current polling sites, the cost to upgrade the sites.

B. Allow the poll worker to determine you are in the right poll site.

C. Direct you to the correct poll site.

D. Record you voted, not manually entered later.  This would prevent someone voting more then once.

E. Allow the poll worker to compare your stored signature and in the future compare your stored photo.

F. On-Demand Ballot Printing - Using your stored information, a blank ballot could be printed for you Election District, in your preferred language.

This was discussion on the new Online Voter Registration and Update system now being used through the Department of Motor Vehicle.  Everyone liked the concept of the new system and asked when it could be used by all the government agencies.  The one negative is it currently only allows voters who are drivers to use it.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati talk bubble Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us Digg! StumbleUpon

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Internet Elections

In a milestone event for India’s electoral history, people of Gujarat recently participated in India’s first Internet election.

One of the major advantages of this implementation is the ability to cast a vote from any Internet connected device from your home or elsewhere, thus avoiding the long queues you would usually face in the polling booths.

This could also drive voter participation upwards among working professionals, who are usually bound by a long working schedule and hence cannot waste several hours waiting for their turn at the poll booth.

This was the second time online voting was successfully used after a trial run in September 2010. And the results were quite impressive with 77.16% of registered voters casting their votes electronically.

Following this impressive response, many states in India are now considering implementing them in the upcoming elections and Scytl, the Spain based company whose software is currently being used, has recently opened up a branch in New Delhi.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati talk bubble Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us Digg! StumbleUpon