Touch screen voting is stupidly expensive

It's not often that I would call The Inquirer -- the tech industry's closest thing to a tabloid newspaper -- a source of insightful and well-balanced opinion, but their article today about the costs of touchscreen voting just hit too close to my own heart to ignore. Citing a study (pdf) conducted by the Maryland voting integrity group Save Our Votes, they note that:

• The voting machines themselves cost about $3,000 apiece.
• Maryland's counties took out $67 million in loans to buy those machines and will be paying them through 2014, despite the fact the kiosks will be out of use by 2010.
• By the end of this election year Maryland will have spent over $97.5 million on the voting machines it's planning to scrap.
• Beyond the cost of the machines, the state will have paid Diebold at least $44 million for operating, maintaining and storing the actual machines as well as programming, testing, and transportation services to and from precincts, as well as training poll workers and performing "voter outreach" to promote their use among the electorate.
  

In all, "SaveOur Votes analysed the cost of touch screen electronic voting machines in those counties. In most of the counties their average costs per voter increased 179 per cent. At least one county saw its costs per voter increase 866 per cent, from a total cost of about $22,000 in 2001 to $266,000 in 2007."

Now I know that governments have a habit of making bad decisions and paying too much for them, but an 866% increase for worse performance is pretty stunning even for them. Throw in the fact that every known e-voting platform has (or can be) hacked, and I'd say this is perhaps the most ill-fated electronic governance project ever. Period.

Tags: electronic voting, kiosks, self-service

Researchers hack nearly every kind of voting kiosk available

Simply attempting to accomplish the goal stated in the title suggests that the researchers in question were hoping for a bit of free press. But given how important the transactions carried out by e-voting kiosks are, I hope they get a lot of it. According to this article from the San Francisco Chronicle, "state-sanctioned teams of computer hackers were able to break through the security of virtually every model of California's voting machines and change results or take control of some of the systems' electronic functions."

Now to be fair, the researchers were given the source code to the devices, as well as instruction manuals and physical access to the hardware itself, which isn't too likely to happen out in the real world. But given that two of the three items in question are a mere Internet leak away, it's reasonable to be a little bit worried about deploying these devices to hundreds of polling locations with minimal physical security come November.

Tags: electronic voting, kiosks

New York says e-voting software must be escrowed

In a blow to Microsoft and all electronic voting systems based on their Windows platform, the New York State Assembly recently upheld a bid that will require all voting software -- including the operating system upon which it runs -- be placed in a secured escrow so that it may be examined by experts in the event of a questionable outcome. While makers of the voting software itself (notable Diebold) were vocal about having the clause weakened or removed, Microsoft was even more argumentative, as the source code to the Windows OS is one of its most closely guarded secrets. As Bo Lipari, executive director of New Yorkers for Verified Voting, noted in this ComputerWorld article,

"concerned citizens created a groundswell of support in the legislature to ensure the law remained untouched...

"We won for a change," he said on Friday. He estimated that about 3,000 constituent calls had been placed with the legislature about the issue. "There was a huge outpouring of support and the legislature noticed this. It was a forceful way to remind them to re-affirm their commitment to these strong laws."

New York State Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, a Democrat from the 125th Assembly District, echoed that sentiment. "The voting machine vendors have known for two years what our laws said," Lifton said Thursday. "Now they're saying that those parts of their systems using Microsoft software have to be proprietary? It's just wrong. We're holding firm on our current state law which calls for open source code.

"This is one extremely clear-cut example (to me, at least) of where opening up the source code is absolutely vital. While we can all hem and haw about the relative security and technological merits of opened versus proprietary source code, when it comes to the politics and the law, which both seem to attract trouble and corruption, the right to review every last subroutine and function of a voting machine is something that I'd like to see more states with electronic voting initiatives require.

Given incredibly short and poor history of electronic voting technologies in the US, my gut feeling right now is that relying on the vendors of these products to be open and honest (and knowledgeable about their products) is just asking for trouble.

Tags: electronic voting, voting kiosks, e-voting

French parties call voting machines a 'catastrophe'

Zut alors! Looks like the US isn't the only country having a trouble with its electronic voting equipment, as after spending several years out of the spotlight of the e-voting misadventure, three unlikely allies in the French political party system (namely the Socialists, the Communists and the Greens) united to call the kiosks a "catastrophe." These quotes from PhysOrg (an unlikely source I'll admit, but it's more of a tech issue than a political one I suppose), say it all:

Amid big queues in general to vote, people using the electronic machines were forced to wait up to two hours to cast ballots... Daniel Guerin, a member of the Paris regional council, made an official complaint to the Constitutionl Council because of "disfunctioning" machines in his constituency in Villeneuve-le-Roi, in the Paris suburbs.

The elderly had particular problems with the machines. Many said they did not believe the computerised system would keep their vote secret.

"I have come here twice and twice I have had to walk away without voting. It takes too long," said Pierre Bascoulergue, a pensioner in Issy-les-Moulineaux, near Paris. "I just don't trust these machines."

The Issy town hall said the long queues were because of the huge turnout in the election.

In the champagne capital of Reims in eastern France a breakdown delayed the start of computer voting. The complicated machines further held up voting in the city during the day.

"It is total chaos, we don't understand anything," said 70-year-old Suzanne Antoine.

"You put your card in and it says 'continue'. Then nothing lights up. I managed to finish but I prefer the way it was before."

Researchers at Paul Verlaine University in Metz said that trials on two of the three machines used in France showed that four people out of every seven aged over 65 could not get their votes recorded.

Researcher Gabriel Michel, a psychologist, said the machines posed "enormous problems".

The computer has several buttons that allow electors to choose the candidate they want to back. There is also an "abstention" button for protest votes.

While the machines have caused a bit of an uproar during their first outing in a French presidential election, they were only used for about 1.5 million of France's 44.5 voters, so things clearly could have been much worse. Oh well, at least they weren't using Diebold machines...

Tags: electronic voting, e-voting, self-service, kiosks