The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
E-Ballot: An electronic voting machine that will be used to count votes during in the 2008 presidential election.
Accuvote
The 2008 presidential election could be shaken by flawed electronic voting technology.
As the US heads into a historic and contentious presidential election, concerns over electronic voting technology could be about to stir up controversy over the legitimacy of some results.
Ironically, electronic voting machines were meant to make elections more reliable and secure. After the 2000 presidential election, when spoiled ballots and "hanging chads" sent the disputed result all the way to the Supreme Court, Congress began dispensing billions of dollars to help states replace punch-card ballots with more-sophisticated voting technology. Since then, however, concerns over the trustworthiness of electronic voting system have steadily grown.
Already in several key states, early voting has seen touch-screen voting machines "flip" votes from one candidate to another. Some voters casting early ballots in Virginia, Tennessee, and Texas say that machines have flipped their votes. All were able eventually to correct the mistake, but this has added a sense of urgency to long-held unease over the security and reliability of electronic voting systems.
Earlier this month, a report from Election Data Services (EDS), a Washington, DC-based firm that tracks election administration, said that electronic voting machine usage will drop this year for the first time ever. In Tuesday's election, 32.6 percent of all ballots will be cast using an electronic voting machine, compared to 37.6 percent in 2006, the equivalent of 10 million fewer voters. "Basically, the activists and the political scientists have kind-of won that battle," says EDS president Kimball Brace. "Most election administrators don't find it worthwhile trying to fight the battle and are trying to move on."
Nonetheless, that percentage will still be higher than it was during either of the last two presidential election races: in 2000, 22.0 percent of votes were cast electronically, compared to 29.2 percent in 2004. Also, several key swing states, including Ohio, Indiana, and Nevada, will rely heavily on electronic voting. Ohio and Indiana will use a combination of optically scanned paper ballots and electronic voting machines, while Nevada will rely almost entirely on electronic voting, according to the same EDS study.
Meanwhile, the political situation in Ohio couldn't be more tense. Republicans and Democrats are already wrangling in court about voter registration issues and so, if the race is particularly tight, the state could well be the scene of fierce legal action centered on electronic voting irregularities.
E-voting machines are receiving an unprecedented amount of attention from experts and activists. Grassroots organizations such as Black Box Voting and Video the Vote are urging voters to monitor the election and have already publicized problems with some voting machines, including touch-screen vote flipping.
Many computer security experts have previously raised concerns about the reliability and accountability of these machines, an issue that is complicated, they say, by the fact that they are manufactured by a number of different private companies and make use of proprietary (or undisclosed) computer code. In 2004, Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University, Dan Wallach of Rice University, and colleagues published an analysis of an electronic voting machine used in Maryland and concluded that the machine was "far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts."
It's worth pointing out that paper ballot fraud usually takes a lot of work (and thus many people) because of all the individual pieces of paper and has to be done apart from the voter (that is, not at the polling place).
E-voting fraud can happen with very little effort (a few people) and can be "implemented" by the (unwitting) voter as her or she tries to cast a ballot.
The need to involve more people and have a separate location presumably make paper ballot fraud easier to crack.
You may be familiar with some of the stories of manipulating electronic voting machines, including the GA meddling by Diebold in 2002: (http://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/Cybersecurity_expert_raises_allegations_of_2004_0717.html)
If we want to use electronic voting machines, contracting with private companies to build them is fraught with danger - remember Diebold's execs were Bush fundraisers!
Why not entrust the design to some people who can be expected to do a better job, like NIST. Let them develop the machines and the code, have the hardware built by anyone, then use only NIST certified software?
While hacking of electronic voting machines is very scary, it's so far theoretical (we hope). The machines have another weakness that might have a very real effect on election results: they crash. This morning I stood in line for more than 90 minutes to vote--and most of that was due to the fact the the DRE machines used in my precinct had stopped working shortly after 7 AM, and the election judges didn't get them running again until 8:30. How many people left without voting because they didn't have time to wait?
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
This document is part of the “How-To Guide for Most Common Measurements” centralized resource portal. This tutorial provides a detailed guide for measurement and device considerations to take temperature measurements using thermocouples. Get an introduction to thermocouples, which are inexpensive sensing devices widely used with PC-based data acquisition systems. Also review some specific thermocouple examples and learn how thermocouples work and ways to integrate them into a data acquisition measurement system.
View full PDF >Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
cyberpageman
53 Comments
Text error?
"electronic voting machine usage will drop this year for the first time ever. In Tuesday's election, 37.2 percent of all ballots will be cast using an electronic voting machine, compared to 32.6 percent in 2006"
Have I missed something? A drop from 32.6% to 37.2%? That sounds like an increase.
Reply
willknight
37 Comments
Re: Text error?
Thanks Cyberpageman, that's corrected.
It was 37.6 percent in 2006; it will be 32.6 percent this year.
If you'd like to read the full report from EDS, it can be found here: http://www.edssurvey.com/.
Reply