[ale] Fwd: Voting machines

Mon Dec 14 18:55:23 EST 2020

Paper ballots with the voter filling in circles are the way to go.
This is done in Florida, where I voted for the first time in November.
Each voter watches the counting machine process.  Maybe even have it
print out a receipt showing who was voted for the voter to take home.
Paper ballots should be kept by county for 1-5 years and are the official
record in case recount or audit.

Each ballot is sequentially numbered with a digital signature on the
ballot that is verified by the scanner.  It is tracked which numbered
ballots went to each precinct and verified during scanning.  That numbered
ballot should be tracked at each point except who it is sent or given
to, to maintain voter confidentiality but help detect fraud by election
officials and anyone other than the voter.  This prevents bogus ballots
from being injected, which appears to have happened in the November
election.

Obviously track when voter votes, either in person or by mail, to prevent
multiple voting.

Of course check for a voter voting in multiple precents in a state or in
different states and that a voter proves residency when registering.
Vigorously prosecute fraud.  Oh wait, disregard, that's not about
electronic security.

Spot checking of paper ballots vs machine counts to detect flaky or
hacked scanners.

Picture state or Federal government ID must be provided for registration
or in person voting or copy of same (or similar solution) for mail-in
ballots.  Much fraud here.  Of course match the voter's voting signature
(sign in at poll or outer envelope if mail-in.)  Apparently LOTS of
fraud here in November.  Claims of voter suppression here is a damn lie.
Oh wait, disregard, that's not about electronic security.

Sadly massive voter fraud appears to have happened in November but not
due to hacked machines.  Disagreements to /dev/null please.

Bob

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 01:57:33PM -0600, Bruno Bronosky via Ale wrote:
> The paper ballot "fill in the bubble system" works fine as long as every
> piece of paper has a signed hash and the voter walks away with that hash.
> Using a touch screen machine for people who want/need it works fine, as
> long as it prints a paper ballot that the user turns in. There should be a
> very simple (online?) way for anyone with a serial number to verify that
> their ballot was **counted**. If you want to "audit" your ballot at any
> time, that state ought to be able to produce a container that your ballot
> is known to be in and the totals for that container. It would be possible
> for any GA high school graduate to walk away confident that at least the
> container that holds their ballot contains exactly what the label claims.
> The totals and a list of contained hashes would be available to anyone who
> wants them. There would also be a list of who has audited each container.
> 
> This solves:
> - Voters must not be able to be compelled to vote any specific way (ballots
> are anonymous)
> - Ballots that go missing can be identified
> - Ballots that do not originate from the Authority can be identified
> - Ballots that are duplicated can be identified
> - Vote totals can be verified
> 
> All ballot hashes are produced from a digital key that only the Authority
> (a single human) has access to. Ballots are only printed as needed. The
> accountability falls on the Authority to ensure the security of the
> ballots. That individual or someone in the chain of command will face legal
> consequences for impropriety.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> 
> .!# BrunoBronosky #!.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 12:37 PM Sean Kilpatrick via Ale <ale at ale.org> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Sean Kilpatrick <kilpatms at gmail.com>
> > Date: Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ale] Voting machines
> > To: DJ-Pfulio <DJPfulio at jdpfu.com>, Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > There is a very real cost to using paper ballots: a human cost.
> > Paper ballots work well for VERY SMALL precincts:  think <500 ballots cast.
> > I have lived in a small rural county with five precincts, each with less
> > than 600 registered voters.  All voting done on paper ballots.
> > Volunteer precinct workers arrive at 5 am and count EVERY blank ballot
> > before the polls open at 7 am.  There will be one ballot for National
> > elections, one for state elections, one for local elections and, very often
> > yet another ballot for some sort of "special" election. When the polls
> > close at 7 pm the volunteers (who have been there for 14 hours so far) lock
> > the doors, eat dinner and begin counting, starting with all the unused
> > ballots.  On a seriously contested election there will be maybe 350 - 400
> > ballots in each ballot box.  If everything goes smoothly, the counting will
> > be done by midnight and the poll workers can go home -- all except the
> > precinct captain who must deliver all the ballot boxes, ballots (used and
> > unused), and tally sheets to the County Voting Registrar's office first.
> > If you tried to double the size of the precinct the counting wouldn't
> > finish until after sunrise -- the first time you tried this.  The next time
> > would be problematic because you would lose ALL of your volunteers.
> > A lot of time can be saved by using a machine to count the ballots, but
> > this gives rise to a different set of problems, as many on this list will
> > appreciate.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:45 AM DJ-Pfulio via Ale <ale at ale.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I disagree with having any voting machines at all. They are a waste
> >> of money, add complexity where it isn't needed.
> >>
> >> Voting in Georgia has 2 complex processes (election day and early
> >> voting) and 1 simple process (absentee) when only 1 simple process
> >> is needed.  Pen and paper.
> >>
> >> Why make it harder than that?
> >>
> >> Pen and paper can be used for absentee, early and election day
> >> voting. Humans (election workers) don't need to learn 2 complex
> >> processes and waste time setting up computers, securing power,
> >> equipment, and generally wasting money for things not directly
> >> related to reading a ballot.
> >>
> >> Paper ballots scale by adding tables and chairs.
> >> Power outages don't stop voting.
> >>
> >> Missing memory cards?  Huh? Why is that even a thing?  Human training
> >> failures will continue to happen, as long as the processes are complex.
> >>
> >> Pen and paper is the answer.
> >>
> >> Question: Why don't ACT/SAT use computers for testing kids?
> >> Answer: because it is a stupid idea due to logistics, expense,
> >>         complexity.
> >>
> >> If I had my way, Georgia would move towards the way that Oregon
> >> votes and registers voters. The goal is to get every Georgia citizen
> >> to vote legally and to allow citizens who choose not to vote or be
> >> registered to do that as well. But it needs to be harder NOT to be
> >> registered than to get registered, not the other way around.
> >>
> >> Voting on my kitchen table, where I can spend a few days looking
> >> through candidates, their platforms, and considering each is much
> >> better than "winging it" on election day after waiting in line.
> >> Someone said they "only" had to wait in line 2 hours to vote early
> >> in October.  That's a waste of time. Have the absentee ballot delivered
> >> to your home, then vote when it is convenient to you any time before
> >> election day.
> >>
> >> If your postal delivery isn't secure, then use early voting ... or
> >> pick up a ballot package, take it home. This isn't possible today in
> >> Georgia, but hopefully they will make it so. No need to have both
> >> early voting as a separate process.
> >>
> >> I love the ballot drop off boxes. Simple, elegant, convenient. No need
> >> to trust the USPS, if you don't want that.
> >>
> >> In Oregon, they've not seen any widespread voting fraud in the 20+ yrs
> >> they've been voting by mail. Seems like a good system to me. Definitely
> >> more convenient.
> >>
> >> IMHO.
> >>
> >> On 12/8/20 11:23 AM, Jim Kinney via Ale wrote:
> >> > The current process with text and QR codes is an improvement. If the
> >> > validation also includes extensive spot checks that QR matches text,
> >> > it's a good indicator things are OK.
> >> >
> >> > I've not seen if that was done but it seems the powers that run the
> >> > election are trying to get it into an acceptable process.
> >> >
> >> > If the scanner into the bin also included a display with a choice to
> >> > approve of disapprove the scanning, that would satisfy me the scanner
> >> > works as designed. If approved, votes are cast. If not, ballot is
> >> > rejected and some validation testing is done including destruction of
> >> > ballot and recreation of ballot by voter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On December 8, 2020 10:21:31 AM EST, Adrya Stembridge via Ale
> >> > <ale at ale.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Is there still a lingering belief that Georgia's election results
> >> > (specifically) are suspect?  The Carter Center independently oversaw
> >> > the election and hand paper recounts and found zero evidence of
> >> > fraud.  The big question is in light of what evidence is available,
> >> > should we distrust Georgia's new voting machines going forward?
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:16 AM Bruno Bronosky via Ale <ale at ale.org
> >> > <mailto:ale at ale.org>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Yeah, I don't think we should engage it support or position to
> >> > political candidates or parties on this list. We have, however,
> >> > discussed policies since it's inception. We have always limited those
> >> > policy discussions to what is relevant to Open Source software. I
> >> > would like to think that we can ignore the candidates and come
> >> > together around the idea that transparent and accurate elections are
> >> > essential. As "software socialists" I don't think any of us are
> >> > likely to find a politician* we would feel justified in advocating**
> >> > for to this audience (**which is what we all want to avoid). For that
> >> > reason I don't think we need to be afraid to discuss voting
> >> > technology.
> >> >
> >> > * I've never heard of a major politician insisting that any software
> >> > purchased by the government is owned by the tax payers and that at a
> >> > minimum we should all be free to run it, but ultimately we should
> >> > also be Free to exercise the 4 Freedoms of Free Software.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 10:24 PM SpaXpert, Inc. <spaxpert at gmail.com
> >> > <mailto:spaxpert at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > It's the biggest hot potato of the century Bruno.  I get it that
> >> > nobody wants to speak up because that could cause a huge political
> >> > divide amongst the ALE group. We really don't need this discourse as
> >> > we all seem to get along here with our problem solving and missions
> >> > in mind. Take care man. Doug
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 11:16 PM Bruno Bronosky via Ale <ale at ale.org
> >> > <mailto:ale at ale.org>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I know this used to be a big issue with this group. I'm surprised
> >> > there's no talk of it now.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ale mailing list
> >> Ale at ale.org
> >> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> >> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo