Feds: Paperless Voting Machines Insecure

Report Cites Electronic Voting Machines That Lack Paper Trails As Vulnerable To Malicious Attacks, Fraud

(AP)  Paperless electronic voting machines in widespread use across the country may be vulnerable to errors or sabotage and cannot be made secure, a draft report by a federal agency said.

The report by researchers at the influential National Institute of Standards and Technology said the paperless voting machines — essentially notebook computers programmed to display ballot images and record voter choices — "in practical terms cannot be made secure."

"Many people, especially in the computer engineering and security community, assert that the (voting machines) are vulnerable to undetectable errors as well as malicious software attacks," the report said.

A key weakness is that there is no audit mechanism or paper trail to verify election results other than what the machine itself reports, the report said.

"Potentially, a single programmer could 'rig' a major election," the report said.

After examining the issue, including volunteering as election workers at polling sites, NIST researchers said in their report that they concluded that they not know how to write "testable requirements" to make the machines secure and it is their recommendation that the machines "in practical terms cannot be made secure."

Many states bought the paperless electronic voting machines with money provided by Congress after the 2000 presidential election, whose disputed results went all the way to the Supreme Court.

Gail Porter, NIST's public affairs director, emphasized that the draft report is a "discussion document" whose conclusions and recommendations could change.

The report will be discussed at a meeting Monday by NIST's Technical Guidelines Development Committee at the agency's headquarters in Gaithersburg, Md. The committee is tasked under a law enacted by Congress in 2002 to advise the Election Assistance Commission on developing guidelines for voting systems.

Election experts applauded the report's findings.

"The new NIST report is confirmation that the mandatory verified voter trails the DNC and its Voting Rights Institute have championed are vital to restoring the confidence of the American people in their own democracy," Donna Brazile, chair of the Democratic National Committee's Voting Rights Institute, said in a statement Friday.

[davidwayne20]

They needed a report to find this out?
I figured that one out the very first time I heard about paperless voting machines. VERY BAD IDEA!
Can you say Bush Dynesty?
Next up Jeb, then Laura, then Barbara

[vancouverboo]

Maybe that's why the power structure likes them.

[pendragon679]

THIS is news??? This is precisely why my wife & I chose to vote absentee in the most recent election, and will likely do the same in the next. Why are we so obsessed with high-tech in this matter? It seems to me a low-tech solution would be more secure & less prone to fraud than the current system.

[nativewoman]

Duh! Ya think?

[roach9703]

The only way to have a secure ballot system appears to be paper ballots fed into optical scanners. The technology is well developed over lone period of time.

[feelfree1]

CBS is a couple of years too late on this issue. Better late than never, I suppose.

Will CBS News now investigate some of the vote fraud efforts of recent years?

www.ericblumrich/gta.html

[feelfree1]

roach9703,

Re: Optical scanners

I think this idea does have some potential, but attention must still be given to the 'tabulation' equipment/process.

[misha131]

Paper ballots are good -- there will be a anual audit trail.

Optical scanners have similar issues with DRE devices in terms of the programmer and calibration issues. However with the paper ballot (manual audit is an option) -- a second centralized mechanical recount can occur on a DIFFERENT manufacturer's hardware by different personnel (non-poll workers including both setup and operation for the central machine) comparing the results to assure the precinct machines were calibrated correctly and potentially detect software flaws as different software from different programmers check each other. Furthermore a canvassing process allowing each candidate or representatives from the opposing side of the issue to choose precincts (around 5% of the voters - 2 1.2% per candidate/representative) to validate in fact that the machine counts were accurate. Errors in canvassing of a defined significant level should trigger a complete manual count. The results of counts at each stage of the process should be reported to allow for independant monitoring of the election results.

With a good procedure optical scanners would be valuable.

[djberson]

Funny, I read "Hack the Vote" in April 2004 issue of Vanity Fair. This article exposed what we already knew. Interesting timing for the feds to be finally noticing this long-known and dismissed FACT.

[book54552134]

Every voter, whether Republican, Democrat or Independent deserve the right to expect that their vote will be registered & properly tabulated. Voters have the right to expect that if any problems result in any election, there will be a valid & dependable process by which authorities can recheck & recount all votes that have been cast. Voter confidence in the electoral process must be restored regardless of the cost. It is what makes the American Democratic process legitimate.

[gertped]

The question is , who contracted for the purchase of these paperless voting machines? Trust me , any person (of integrity) with even marginal intelligence would have made sure that any government voting system would have a back-up to audit or re-count.

[gertped]

Most of the controversy seemed centered on the Diebold machines. For all the folks out there that voted absentee because of distrust of those machines , please know that the scanners used to tabulate those absentee ballots were manufactured by Diebold.

[gertped]

Most of the controversy seemed centered on the Diebold machines. For all the folks out there that voted absentee because of distrust of those machines , please know that the scanners used to tabulate those absentee ballots were manufactured by Diebold.

[blarma]

Voting machines can be perfected along with a paper audit trail to the point where it would be very difficult to fix an election. Like so many other issues the national will is not there. So what else is new?

[nativewoman]

Posted by gertped at 07:38 PM : Dec 02, 2006

Some links for your review regarding the Act that started it and the acquisition of systems:

Help American Vote Act of 2002
http://www.fec.gov/hava/hava.htm

State by State Contracts Voter Registration Database contracts:
http://www.electionline.org/Default.aspx?tabid=288

State by State known electronic voting issues. Looks like maybe contracts are awarded state by state, or county by county or maybe even city by city. This site tells you who the manufactured the equipment:
http://www.ejfi.org/Voting/Voting-128.htm

Also, check out www.bradblog.com. He's been following this stuff for quite awhile.

[firststate]

Both systems have problems, the touch system%u2019s problems are covered here. Optical scanning%u2019s biggest problem is incorrectly marked ballots with an "X" or check instead of filling the space. Eventually, errant marks may be the new version of the (in)famous chads.

Combination of the two systems could use the best of each and eliminate their problems. Any selection device, even the current touch screens with a printer added can give the voter a printed optical scan ballot, spaces correctly filled, showing their choices for verification and deposit in an high tech container, a ballot box. A simpler optical scan system could then scan and report results. The two halves, select/print and scan/report, wouldn%u2019t need to be connected. Verifying reported results has a number of real possibilities before the dreaded hand recount, which would be easier without the need to decide if the voter meant a mark to be a vote.

The select-print part of the system would cost a small fraction of the touch screen recording and reporting machines since the most expensive part, their questionable software would be eliminated. It%u2019s simplicity would be a security & economic advantage. The scanning-report portion%u2019s costs would decline with consistent correctly marked ballots.

Simplifying and combining can produce elections where every vote will count, with more accuracy and cost less.

[bluestardad]

you knew this all along but have done nothing!

[grumpas]

I always wonder when I step away from the voting machine if my vote is going to the person I touched on the screen? My state has the paper trail and I always use it! But, I think anything that is electronic can be tampered with or malfunction! I think it is time to restore some integrity to the voting system! Make it a Federal crime to tamper with an election (and I mean jail time)!In fact, I think a lot of the voting system needs to be overhauled! I really object to my electorial votes going for Bush! I didn't vote for the .....! So, why should he get my state's electorial votes? Go by popular vote and be done with it! That is the only way the voter will feel like their vote counts for something!

[frankly6]

This is just one more real issue that the "do nothing" GOP congress was ignoring despite repeated calls for oversight on the local, state and national levels. My guess is that the ease of manipulating these systems was used to benefit them and so they saw no need.

[thgdriver]

I am sure the Democrats knew or should have known the the machines are rigged in thier favor. They will never do anything about something they can rig up to win. I knew after the midterms that something was up!

[frankly6]

Democrats have been raising this issue for years and have been flatly ignored by the no oversight GOP congress. They were more concerned with preserving their majority than having an honest representative vote.

[feelfree1]

frankly6,

Re: "Democrats have been raising this issue for years"

Not many of them. In 2006 the Democrats were busy marketing their pro-war candidate, John Kerry- a man who personally voted in favor of implementing these machines.

Instead of pressing the obvious vote-fraud issues, Democrat Party strategists spent their energies smearing the only qualified man in the race- Ralph Nader.

Have you seen this Flash presentation of the 2000 Florida election fraud?

www.ericblumrich/gta.html

Instead of demonstrating some leadership and integrity on this issue, the Democrats squandered their resources in an effort to blame Nader for this shameful Democrat Party failure as well.

[feelfree1]

Correction, I meant "2004", not "2006".

[agnim]

Leave it to our secretive and deceptive government to keep us in the dark; and then tell us something after we already found another path to the important information we should have had before an election can be stolen; and Americans get saddled yet again with a certified idiot as our dear leader! LOL

[pakaal]

Oregon's vote by mail has given them the top five spot in voter turnout for the past several elections. It has a paper trail, is as tamper-proof as any methods we have now, is as easy as putting your vote in the mailbox, gives you time to consider your choices at home at your leisure rather than while standing in a booth, and is much more cost-effective.

http://www.votebymailproject.org/

[antoniof123]

DUH

[hermit22]

how can we be sure the democrates really got voted in by humans to the DC mini majority?

[feelfree1]

Hermit22,

Re: "how can we be sure the democrates really got voted in by humans to the DC mini majority?"

We can't. That's why this is not a partisan issue.

[feelfree1]

Re: "Feds: Paperless Voting Machines Insecure"

CBS could start a whole new section with this story, dubbed the "No ***, Sherlock!?" section.